Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Findmypast - updated Ts and Cs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Findmypast - updated Ts and Cs

    Have just received the following email from FMP which I thought might be of general interest.

    Terms and Conditions Update

    Dear Elaine,

    You are receiving this mail as an essential service update to inform you about changes to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy. The key changes cover the following areas:

    * Fair Usage limits – we have dramatically increased the monthly Fair Usage Limit for subscribers and simplified how we calculate it. The new limit is a huge 5000 record views per month and we will send a warning email if you start to get close to this limit. We will also be introducing a counter on the website soon to let you see how close to the limit you are getting.

    * Continuous membership for subscribers – we have clarified your options to cancel continuous membership from the "My account" area of the website. Your loyalty discount of 20% is automatically applied when you renew using continuous membership.

    * Free trial – a 14 day free trial is now available to new users of the site. There is a lower Fair Usage Limit of 400 record views during a Free Trial. The Free Trial does not include access to the 1911 census.

    * Lookups – we have made it clearer that providing "lookups" for other people is not allowed.

    * Company name changes – Find My Past Limited has changed its name to brightsolid online publishing limited. This is simply a name change – we are still owned by the same company (brightsolid online innovation limited) and this name change does not affect your use of the website in any way.
    Elaine








  • #2
    I just got this too Elaine how many views were allowed before then ??

    Comment


    • #3
      I think it was originally 2000 credits which increased to 5000 credits when the 1911 census was included on the FMP subscription.

      According to this email it is now 5000 record views ... rather than 5000 credits.

      It is good to see that they are going to install a counter as I know some members were concerned about unknowingly exceeding the limits.
      Elaine







      Comment


      • #4
        From the FMP website

        7. Fair Use Policy for Subscribers

        7.1 To ensure a high quality service for all customers, we enforce a “Fair Usage Policy” for Users with a Subscription whereby we place a cap on use of the Services. For Free Subscriptions, you may access 400 Records during the Free Trial Offer period. For Chargeable Subscriptions, you may access an average of 5000 Records per calendar month.
        7.2 If you have exceeded your Fair Usage limit for Our Free Trial Offer and you attempt to access a further Record, We will inform you on the Website and by email that you have reached your Fair Usage limit for a Free Trial Offer and that your access to the Free Subscription has ended. You will be given the opportunity to purchase a Chargeable Subscription at that time. If you do not purchase a Chargeable Subscription at that time, your Free Subscription will automatically change to a Chargeable Subscription at the end of the specified Free Trial Offer period in accordance with Clause 5.7, unless you cancel your Free Subscription before the expiry of the specified period.

        7.3 If you have exceeded your Fair Usage limit for a Chargeable Subscription and attempt to access a further Record, We will inform you on the Website and by email that as you have exceeded your Fair Usage limit for Chargeable Subscriptions your access to the Chargeable Subscription will be suspended and then reactivated on the first day of the next calendar month.

        7.4 We may revise our Fair Usage Policy from time to time and will advise you of any changes made.
        ... so it definitely looks as if they have changed to individual records viewed, rather than credits.
        Elaine







        Comment


        • #5
          This line might be relevant to forums.

          Lookups – we have made it clearer that providing "lookups" for other people is not allowed.

          Ken

          Comment


          • #6
            I am happy because I feel that FMP have listened to what some of we clients have asked for.
            I took part in a recent survey and explained about how many credits were needed to view all the inhabitants of a village (previously you could have seen the lot in about 15 images: now it is an image per household.)
            I also asked for a counter.
            So, thankyou FMP, for listening to your customers, recognising genuine difficulties and attempting to resolve problems.

            Jay
            Janet in Yorkshire



            Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

            Comment


            • #7
              yes the counter is a good idea

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by kenw55 View Post
                This line might be relevant to forums.

                Lookups – we have made it clearer that providing "lookups" for other people is not allowed.

                Ken
                How would they know???:conf::conf:

                I have 1857 different surnames in my tree, combined with my OH's so that's a lot. So how would they be able to tell if I'm looking for people in my tree or for someone else?
                Wendy



                PLEASE SCAN AT 300-600 DPI FOR RESTORATION PURPOSES. THANK YOU!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Wendy, I think you will find they watch forums, such as FTF!
                  Elaine







                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I dont know about anybody else but I was not pleased when I read their email. Ancestry does not worry how times you look at the records once your sub is paid. The fee on FMP is not cheap and I really do not see why they can restrict your viewing when you've paid I sub. I have bought quite a few units and was considering joining them with a years sub once my sub with ancestry expired but I dont think I will bother now. I am going to stick with Ancestry.
                    GWEN

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think the limit is in place so place so as to ensure it is for personal research only and to prevent people using it for business use or lookups for others.

                      I think if you read the Ts and Cs of Ancestry you will find a similar clause re doing lookups. The difference is Ancestry does not seem to be interested in enforcing it.
                      I don't think the FMP clause re lookups is new - I think it has always been there - they are just making it clearer.
                      Elaine







                      Comment


                      • #12
                        one month you use 3000, next month 4000, so = 7000

                        then the third month you use your limit of 5000

                        what then ? because technicley you should be still in credit by 3000

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Their Ts & Cs state an average of 5000 Records per calendar month, so I presume technically you would still be within maximum usage (with 3000 views in credit)
                          Elaine







                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Presumably you could view 4000 records in your first month, then 6000 the next, as your average per month would therefore not exceed the limit. However, you couldn't do it in reverse (i.e. 6000 records then 4000) as you would then exceed the "average" in your first month.

                            But 5000 is a high limit - that's ~170 records per day. If you sat on your computer for 10 hours per day, every day, and looked at a new record on average every four minutes, you still wouldn't exceed this new limit! Therefore I think it unlikely that many people will be affected. Even if you were doing lookups, or using it for professional research, I think it unlikely that you would exceed that limit - which begs the question, why have they bothered with it in the first place?

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X