Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: New TOS at GEDmatch 18 May 2019 for law enforcement matching

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    208
    Sex

    New TOS at GEDmatch 18 May 2019 for law enforcement matching

    GEDmatch has a new TOS, which you must accept in order to log in. Once logged in, you will see some new choices about the matching process.

    EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, ALL DNA KITS DEFAULT TO BE OPTED-OUT OF MATCHING BY LAW ENFORCEMENT. YOU CAN SET A KIT TO OPT-IN FOR MATCHING BY LAW ENFORCEMENT BY CLICKING ON THE "POLICE" OR "PENCIL" ICONS TO THE RIGHT OF THE KIT NUMBER ON THIS PAGE, IF YOU DESIRE TO DO SO.

    KITS WITHOUT ANY "POLICE" ICON ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT MATCHING.

    We encourage everybody to select the first option, "public opt-in", for kits that they manage, unless you have specific reasons to choose one of the other options. There are thousands of families depending on GEDmatch for closure to terrible tragedies.
    Even if you previously made your kit Public because you were willing to be included in law enforcement matching, you will need to affirm that choice. Use the pencil icon next to the kit.

    If you previously made your kit Research because you wanted to restrict matching with law enforcement kits, you now have the option of being Public while opting out of matching with LE kits. LE would be able to see matches of matches, but they would not be able to do a 1:1 comparison if that kit had opted out.

    To make your kits completely invisible to LE, mark your kits as Research.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ann Turner For This Useful Post:

     NixYO (05-30-2019),  pmokeefe (05-30-2019)

  3. #2
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    341
    Sex
    Location
    Ohio
    Ethnicity
    German
    Nationality
    Galactic Empire
    Y-DNA
    R-Z324, Z5055, L188+
    mtDNA
    H5

    It will be interesting to see what the "opt-in" statistics are in about a month.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Cofgene For This Useful Post:

     pmokeefe (05-30-2019)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    257
    Sex

    Most people don't take unnecessary steps, and GEDMatch has made it look extremely dangerous (Whatever the truth might be) by literally painting it in blood red in the Terms of Service, so I think those statistics will mostly reflect GEDMatch's take on it. I still don't understand the basis of treating law enforcement as unique category, short of the extreme anti-authoritarianism of some people, and I don't see how this is not legally obstruction of justice. Could any other establishment get away with hanging "No service to law-enforcement" sign, and what message does it send to the public?

    Personally, I'm much more worried about private investigators, paparazzi/tabloid journalists, intelligence officers, overzealous researchers, transplant procurers, nosy next-door neighbors and uses we haven't even thought of yet than I am about duly authorized officers using it for investigation or bringing closure to families of dead people. And even then the risk is mostly from public family trees, unless the person of interest has directly tested. It might be noted that the current ToS explicitly allows use for identifying dead people, unless you're law enforcement. It would be far better for companies to offer a list of different uses to opt-in to than to paint a single use as bad, and give a much more accurrate view of what people actually want. In the end, of course, it will only be possible to enforce rules based on how the sample was obtained, ie. identified in person, mailed in saliva, trace DNA sequencing, self-produced etc.

    Worth noting the ToS still has "Direct access to your data is available to GEDmatch personnel, including volunteers, on a need to know basis." means all mentioned parties and more may still have access even to actual raw data, "We may use your data in our own research, to develop or improve applications." that amounts to carte blanche purpose of processing that's forbidden by GDPR, and "An artificial DNA kit (if and only if: (1) it is intended for research purposes; and (2) it is not used to identify anyone in the GEDmatch database)" with no idea what it actually means but may cover bioinformatics / format conversion techniques. I appreciate the work GEDMatch does & the service they provide, and believe they do what they believe they have to do to keep the service running. It's worth noting the big picture rather than focusing on a singular use, though.
    Last edited by Donwulff; 05-25-2019 at 07:42 AM.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Donwulff For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (06-08-2019),  pmokeefe (05-30-2019)

  7. #4
    Junior Member
    Posts
    8
    Sex

    IMO good decision

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to gene.test For This Useful Post:

     NixYO (05-30-2019)

  9. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    71
    Sex
    Location
    Sweden
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Nationality
    Swedish
    Y-DNA
    N1a1a1a1a1a2a
    mtDNA
    I4

    Sweden Finland Kalmar Union Russian Federation Russia Imperial
    The site is down right now.
    ďAnd, furthermore, that some people have a sex life and others donít just because some are more attractive than others. I wanted to acknowledge that if people donít have a sex life, itís not for some moral reason, itís just because theyíre ugly. Once youíve said it, it sounds obvious, but I wanted to say it.Ē ó Michel Houellebecq

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to NixYO For This Useful Post:

     pmokeefe (05-30-2019)

  11. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,374
    Sex
    Location
    New York
    Ethnicity
    South Asian
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA
    J2b2-M241 (J-Y978*)
    mtDNA
    M30b2a

    United States of America Canada
    Is it just me or does admixture and phasing work differently than on the old Gedmatch site? I know they warned against it, but it worked pretty well on the old one. On the new one, not at all...
    Paternal - Y-DNA: J2b2* (J-M241) Z2432+ Z2433+ Y978+ (J2b2a2b1*) (Hidden Content ) (YFull: YF02959) (FTDNA Kit B6225), mtDNA: M18a* (FTDNA Kit 329180) (YFull: YF63773)
    Maternal- Y-DNA: R1a1a1b2a1a2c2d5a* L657+ Y7+ (R-Y16494) (FTDNA Kit 311047), mtDNA: Hidden Content (FTDNA Kit B6225) (YFull: YF02959) (Mother's Mother's Father: R1a1a1b2a1a2c2* Y7+ Y29+ (R-Y29) (FTDNA Kit 329181))

  12. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,167
    Sex
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Ethnicity
    Pictland/Deira
    Y-DNA
    R1b-M222-FGC5864
    mtDNA
    H5r*

    I received their mailshot yesterday evening:

    GEDmatch.com TOS change
    From GEDMatch NotificationsAdd to whitelistAdd to blacklist
    To MacUalraig
    Reply-To Reply Will Be IgnoredAdd to whitelistAdd to blacklist
    Date Fri 18:36

    GEDmatch Inc. is incorporated in the State of Florida, USA.
    Last edited by MacUalraig; 06-08-2019 at 07:26 AM.
    YSEQ:#37; YFull: YF01405 (Y Elite 2013)
    WGS (Full Genomes Nov 2015, YSEQ Feb 2019, Dante Mar 2019, FGC-10X Linked Reads Apr 2019, Dante-Nanopore May 2019) - further WGS tests pending ;-)
    Ancestry GCs: Scots in central Scotland & Ulster, Ireland; English in Yorkshire & Pennines
    Hidden Content
    FBIMatch: A828783 (autosomal DNA) for segment matching DO NOT POST ADMIXTURE REPORTS USING MY KIT

  13. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    190
    Sex
    Location
    Oop North
    Ethnicity
    Mostly Irish/English
    Nationality
    English
    Y-DNA
    Possibly R1b
    mtDNA
    H1a3a1

    England North of England Ireland Scotland Wales Romani Star of David
    While I'm all for allowing law enforcement to access DNA databases if absolutely necessary, I just can't bring myself to do it. I've never committed a crime but I'm just not comfortable with doing it.
    Ethnogene (most accurate so far IMO): Frisian 2.8%, Scottish 19.2%, Welsh 2.4%, English 29.0%, Irish 31.7%, Cornish 1.9%, Irish Traveller 4.0%, French 2.6%, Dutch 1.0%, German 1.8%, Western Indian 1.1%, Central/Southern Ashkenazi 1.0%, Norwegian 1.5%

    "In. Year. Out. See ya."- Chris Wilder

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mildlycurly For This Useful Post:

     FionnSneachta (06-08-2019),  JFWinstone (06-08-2019),  NixYO (06-08-2019)

  15. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,167
    Sex
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Ethnicity
    Pictland/Deira
    Y-DNA
    R1b-M222-FGC5864
    mtDNA
    H5r*

    The guys have shown they are no more trustworthy than Greenspan is since they are arrogant enough to think that they have the right to decide what should be done with other peoples' DNA. I won't be recommending them to people anymore. I can't decide what to do with my own multiple kits though.
    YSEQ:#37; YFull: YF01405 (Y Elite 2013)
    WGS (Full Genomes Nov 2015, YSEQ Feb 2019, Dante Mar 2019, FGC-10X Linked Reads Apr 2019, Dante-Nanopore May 2019) - further WGS tests pending ;-)
    Ancestry GCs: Scots in central Scotland & Ulster, Ireland; English in Yorkshire & Pennines
    Hidden Content
    FBIMatch: A828783 (autosomal DNA) for segment matching DO NOT POST ADMIXTURE REPORTS USING MY KIT

  16. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    257
    Sex

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ess-for-police (Article-count limited)

    I think the main thing to gleam from this is the difference between "opt out" and "opt in". GEDMatch & its terms of service didn't use to restrict use from anyone, but then they introduced opt-out to law-enforcement searches only, and AFAIK practically nobody opted out. Now they switched to opt-in and... predictably almost nobody opted in.

    The site admin acts surprised, but honestly they also made it sound as undesirable as possible. Meanwhile they're getting loads of hate from some circles for allowing law-enforcement searches at all, and hate from relatives of criminals (as quoted in the article) for not helping apprehend them. All the while, FTDNA happily co-operating with law-enforcement and certain circles turning a blind eye... although apparently Parabon's now efficiently out of the business, what's up with that? FTDNA wanting whole business?

    Footnote: Every mainstream news article will be sure to mention & use 23andMe as illustration for the article, despite 23andMe and AncestryDNA being two of the few genetic genealogy services that DON'T allow or even have it possible to run this kind of law-enforcement searches. Or that the law-enfocement DNA databases (In the USA, and many other places) already dwarf genetic genealogy databases, and many of them allow familiar matches, with genealogy technologies and trees being the decisive difference. And somehow people have no problem with private investigators, serial killers, rapists, tin-pot dictators, paparazzi, intelligence officers, organ harvesters and yes paternity-investigators using DNA matching, but draw the line when it comes to law-enforcement.

    Right now the only way to opt out of all of these is to only use services which do not offer DNA matches to uploaded/imported DNA profiles such as 23andMe and AncestryDNA, although I hope there will be emerge a DNA information interchange standard which allows signing the method of DNA authenticiation, so you can specify whether to allow matches to surreptitious/found etc. DNA. But that's still just a stop-gap measure since hand-held DNA analysis devices...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2019, 03:01 AM
  2. Close matching on gedmatch which make no sense
    By Afshar in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-27-2018, 09:47 PM
  3. GEDmatch Archaic Matching
    By TŠltos in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 10-11-2018, 05:16 PM
  4. GEDMATCH MATCHING
    By vintage_sky in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-21-2017, 10:48 PM
  5. Matching on gedmatch?
    By Deftextra in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-14-2016, 12:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •