Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gedmatch no longer accepting FTDNA kits

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by loobster View Post
    What is a BAM file??
    It is the raw data file from a Big Y test. It is used to get additional analysis when doing research on SNPs for haplogroup projects. Which spans from deep ancestry to possibly genealogical time frame if other distant cousins also took the Big Y.

    Originally posted by Tenn4ever View Post
    I'm sure it's FTDNA's doing...

    I have spent thousands of dollars with this company but not ONE MORE penny and I will advise everyone I know not to purchase from them. DNA work is very difficult and THEY have just made it much more difficult.
    Of course it is their doing. That was the whole point with the whole FTDNA/Gedmatch situation. You spent thousands, but they are trying to prevent losing thousands. Maybe FTDNA wouldn't have bothered Gedmatch in the first place if they hadn't been sued by someone simply because they joined a group project and some of their data became public. If FTDNA loses that lawsuit in Alaska, they could lose as much as $100,000. So FTDNA is likely covering themselves from future lawsuits from the few ultra paranoid people that are out there.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by The_Contemplator View Post
      It is the raw data file from a Big Y test. It is used to get additional analysis when doing research on SNPs for haplogroup projects. Which spans from deep ancestry to possibly genealogical time frame if other distant cousins also took the Big Y.



      Of course it is their doing. That was the whole point with the whole FTDNA/Gedmatch situation. You spent thousands, but they are trying to prevent losing thousands. Maybe FTDNA wouldn't have bothered Gedmatch in the first place if they hadn't been sued by someone simply because they joined a group project and some of their data became public. If FTDNA loses that lawsuit in Alaska, they could lose as much as $100,000. So FTDNA is likely covering themselves from future lawsuits from the few ultra paranoid people that are out there.
      Hmmm. Sounds like someone took a Y test and a 'daddy' was found who did not want to be found. I have two brick walls which can not come down because dozens of men who have been asked refuse to take the Y test and I can guess why.

      Comment


      • New Privacy Message

        Has anyone posted this? It was in an email I got titled BAM File Downloads Reinstated. It is also now shown at the top of the Downloads page. Sorry for any duplication.

        "Read before you download: We are committed to protecting the privacy of our customers. By downloading any raw data or reports, you hereby indicate that you are the owner of that data or have permission to download the data, and you further indicate your understanding that Family Tree DNA cannot in any way guarantee the security or privacy of your downloaded data. Furthermore, you understand that by uploading your raw data to a third party application and linking it to your name, Family Tree DNA kit number, email address, or any other identifying information, the security of your raw data and record is further put at risk and may lead to the violation of Family Tree DNA Privacy Policy. By downloading your raw data, you assume the liability for any breach of privacy and release Family Tree DNA from any privacy violation that results either directly or indirectly from the downloaded raw data and/or upload to a third party application."

        Comment


        • Originally posted by teyoung View Post
          Has anyone posted this? It was in an email I got titled BAM File Downloads Reinstated. It is also now shown at the top of the Downloads page. Sorry for any duplication.

          "Read before you download: We are committed to protecting the privacy of our customers. By downloading any raw data or reports, you hereby indicate that you are the owner of that data or have permission to download the data, and you further indicate your understanding that Family Tree DNA cannot in any way guarantee the security or privacy of your downloaded data. Furthermore, you understand that by uploading your raw data to a third party application and linking it to your name, Family Tree DNA kit number, email address, or any other identifying information, the security of your raw data and record is further put at risk and may lead to the violation of Family Tree DNA Privacy Policy. By downloading your raw data, you assume the liability for any breach of privacy and release Family Tree DNA from any privacy violation that results either directly or indirectly from the downloaded raw data and/or upload to a third party application."
          This relates to the problem that they had with their customers uploading to GEDmatch. The language you're seeing is protecting them from any legal consequences that result from their customers uploading FTDNA results to a third party site for further analysis or finding new matches.

          So, I don't see any problem with this. They're saying upfront that their customers own their data, which is what many people in this thread were strongly asserting (correctly so), so that answers that objection some have had. But by agreeing to the language you've quoted, they've made clear that legal problems resulting from a customer uploading his results to a third party site are solely the problem of the customer, which is only fair.

          Everyone knows where they stand. Problem solved.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
            This relates to the problem that they had with their customers uploading to GEDmatch. The language you're seeing is protecting them from any legal consequences that result from their customers uploading FTDNA results to a third party site for further analysis or finding new matches.

            So, I don't see any problem with this. They're saying upfront that their customers own their data, which is what many people in this thread were strongly asserting (correctly so), so that answers that objection some have had. But by agreeing to the language you've quoted, they've made clear that legal problems resulting from a customer uploading his results to a third party site are solely the problem of the customer, which is only fair.

            Everyone knows where they stand. Problem solved.
            Not solved. They have not defined what "privacy" is in the context of the various products that are offered. None of the products allows for the identification of an individual. So what is "private?" Basically this statement allows a very distant cousin to cry foul and shut down all work on a lineage.

            Will this statement completely freeze the ongoing effort to deposit results such as full mtDNA into public databanks? Probably. That is a big loss to science since FTDNA generated results have a dominant share of complete mtDNA data.

            FTDNA is attempting to transfer liability but the cat is out of the bag for hundreds of thousands of results. Since prior results are out there, to some extent in the haplotrees, how valid is this statement?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by wkauffman View Post
              Not solved. They have not defined what "privacy" is in the context of the various products that are offered. None of the products allows for the identification of an individual. So what is "private?" Basically this statement allows a very distant cousin to cry foul and shut down all work on a lineage.

              Will this statement completely freeze the ongoing effort to deposit results such as full mtDNA into public databanks? Probably. That is a big loss to science since FTDNA generated results have a dominant share of complete mtDNA data.

              FTDNA is attempting to transfer liability but the cat is out of the bag for hundreds of thousands of results. Since prior results are out there, to some extent in the haplotrees, how valid is this statement?
              FTDNA is not threatening to sue their customers who download results and upload them somewhere else. They're also not saying that their customers have no right to do that.

              What they are doing is clarifying that the decision to do that is solely the decision of the customers, who own their DNA results. They're also making aware those who upload their results to other sites that there is a potential that someone will object to that upload as an invasion of their privacy, as you mention in what I've bolded from your post.

              Who knows what someone regards as an invasion of privacy and would use that as an excuse to sue FTDNA or a distant cousin who's uploaded results to another website? Do you think that FTDNA ever imagined that they'd be sued by an Alaskan customer who voluntarily joined a project and whose project administrator then posted the person's result on another website? Frankly, I think the Alaskan customer was foolish to join a public project in the first place if he was so concerned about privacy. Yet the lawsuit was filed and FTDNA has to defend itself in court.

              In other words, I don't think that FTDNA can spell out exactly every possibility that someone will consider something an invasion of privacy, so they certainly can't be more specific than they have been. I think they're saying that the customer owns their DNA results and can upload it to other websites, but FTDNA is not responsible for that action if someone regards that as an invasion of privacy. They're asking customers who upload their results to other websites to indicate that they understand the possible consequences and to absolve FTDNA of any liability if there is a problem.

              Comment


              • Not sure if this is the right place for this question

                On the topic of Gedmatch - is there anything I (female) can load manually to their site to start unravelling my genealogical mess while they unravelling their administrative mess?

                **Totally new to this whole thing so be gentle please!**

                Thanks in advance.

                Comment


                • Unless you have done an autosomal test with one of the other 2 companies that Gedmatch accepts, then no at this time there is nothing else you can upload. Gedmatch is only autosomal data.

                  Although there is alternatives to converting FTDNA files to other companies formats, I would just wait for FTDNA/Gedmatch to resolve issue. Hopefully it wont be much longer

                  Comment


                  • Thanks Prairielad. That's what I had suspected but had my fingers crossed that there might be a work around.

                    Comment


                    • To be honest, and of course this only pertains to me, this is no big deal as FamilyTree has been a huge disappointment to me in my search. While I generally get more than one new match a month on the other 2 large sites, I have not had a new match on FT is almost a year. In fact I found my biological father on the 'other' site and continue to search for my mother. I come her once in a while to check on any new matches, but my hopes for any forward movement from FT are slim. I even recommend other sites over FT these days to new 'testers.' FT does not appear to have much activity in their database, again perhaps just related to myself.

                      Comment


                      • I tested with FTDNA when it was the only viable option for UK based customers. That's no longer the case now that the major competitor offers an autosomal service to us in the UK. I am clearly seeing that UK based matches are not appearing for me on FTDNA and the matches in general have reduced considerably whilst matches on their competitor have increased, indeed soared. I particularly valued the FTDNA/Gedmatch connection as I could identify the matches by utilising the Tier 1 facility on Gedmatch simultaneously with another tab opened on ADSA purely for FTDNA. I could then run the matches in common facility on FTDNA. This facility is infinitely superior to the shared matches on the competitor which is at best of no use and at worst clearly wrong. FTDNA had so much to offer and I kind of think it's in danger of losing its market share here in the UK.This should matter to world citizens of UK origin as well because if you can't take your roots over the pond with FTDNA you also might consider looking elsewhere. The longer this current problem goes on the more disillusioned the customer base will become. Address the issues quickly, get back in partnership with Gedmatch and do something to make your service more attractive to all those UK customers you are losing to your competitor.

                        Comment


                        • fix your mess

                          Part of the reason to get tested here is so you can use the results on Gedmatch. I had been planning on testing other family members, but I'm not going to spend hundreds of dollars if the files can't be used.

                          Put your legal squabble to bed soon or your competitors will get the rest of my money.

                          Comment


                          • So, how long should it take FTDNA to follow through with the agreement reported on the GEDmatch home page, and deliver the promised new file format? Is there a corresponding announcement somewhere on the FTDNA site that I have missed? There has to be a time limit, after which a reasonable person would conclude that FTDNA had other motivations for entering into the supposed agreement.

                            Comment


                            • FTDNA has said nothing new since March 19. They probably weren't ready with the new file format when they first contacted Gedmatch about it all.

                              Just look at how long they took to get BAM file requests restored, like 2 months I think? So there is no time limit. Not that it would help, when they gave themselves a deadline for the BAM file situation they still went past it.

                              Hopefully this is the last side effect from that lawsuit they are dealing with. Though who knows, maybe they will find other things to fix just cover themselves from future lawsuits.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by John McCoy View Post
                                So, how long should it take FTDNA to follow through with the agreement reported on the GEDmatch home page, and deliver the promised new file format? Is there a corresponding announcement somewhere on the FTDNA site that I have missed? There has to be a time limit, after which a reasonable person would conclude that FTDNA had other motivations for entering into the supposed agreement.
                                Originally posted by The_Contemplator View Post
                                FTDNA has said nothing new since March 19. They probably weren't ready with the new file format when they first contacted Gedmatch about it all.

                                Just look at how long they took to get BAM file requests restored, like 2 months I think? So there is no time limit. Not that it would help, when they gave themselves a deadline for the BAM file situation they still went past it.

                                Hopefully this is the last side effect from that lawsuit they are dealing with. Though who knows, maybe they will find other things to fix just cover themselves from future lawsuits.
                                I had warned about this back on March 24. Speed is not FTDNA's forte.

                                http://forums.familytreedna.com/show...&postcount=213

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X