Gedmatch no longer accepting FTDNA kits

[josh w.]

DNA Land is still available as a stopgap (Sorry for the repeat on this thread, but the two threads should be combined)

[John McCoy]

If there is a legitimate privacy issue, it needs to be discussed openly by the entire genetic genealogy community and anyone else who is interested. Genetic technology is new, especially in its application to genealogy. It is important to develop a consensus about how the new technology should be used, and how its existence impinges on real or perceived rights, interests, and privileges of individuals, groups, governments, and the public. I do not see how this can happen without a free discussion. Moreover, without such a discussion, those of us on the outside will inevitably reach the conclusion that our interests have not been considered, and very likely, that the actions taken are contrary to our interests, motivated by greed, spite, or something equally offensive.

[RAD]

FTDNA it was nice to meet you...

You reap what you sow. You turned against us,users, we turn against you.

As for now, i'm only expecting bankruptcy and commercial failure for FTDNA

[1/2finn]

FTDNA hates to communicate with their paying clients - us.

[MoberlyDrake]

I'm not happy at because I have an important new match at Ancestry and I was going to ask him to upload to gedmatch and compare him with my cousins.

It appears that both FTDNA and 23andMe are doing everything in their power to put themselves out of business and leave everything to Ancestry. I haven't had a new match at 23andMe in months. It doesn't appear they have much in the way of sales.

[murpheygen]

I've tested at all three DNA companies and up until today FTDNA is the only company I've recommended. 23andme has become useless, and Ancestry does not have the tools. With an Orphan train grandmother and a guardianship at my great grandfather level it takes a village to find ancestors. Which is where Gedmatch comes in. Results are not automatically uploaded to Gedmatch. We take our privacy into our own hands when we do so. It's not for FTDNA to make that decision for us. However it is my decision to withhold recommending FTDNA to future testers until FTDNA gets their priorities straight.
If FTDNA is so concerned about privacy perhaps surname/location project pages should not be public - and only viewed by logged in customers.

[Frederator]

Unacceptable, FTDNA. Once you cash my check, I OWN THE RESULTS, NOT YOU. NOT YOUR CALL.

[JanFos]

This needs to be worked out!



The data is mine. I paid for it. I gave my permission to upload to GEDmatch. Seems pretty simple to me.

[MMaddi]

And why would I care about kit number being public? It's just a number.

Just recently, GEDmatch required their users to include an e-mail address in their account information in order to be included in their public matching database. With that change, it means that an FTDNA kit number and corresponding contact e-mail address are public.

FTDNA only provides e-mail addresses of their customers to matches in the FTDNA database. Now, once someone uploads their Family Finder raw data to GEDmatch, the privacy of that person, whose FTDNA kit number is now public, is compromised.

Someone earlier posted a link to an article about an FTDNA customer from Alaska who is suing FTDNA in federal court for "violating" his privacy. I suspect that FTDNA and their lawyers see more lawsuits coming, now that GEDmatch is publicly linking FTDNA kit numbers and e-mail addresses, and this is the reason for this situation. They're trying to protect themselves from future lawsuits, as spurious as they may be.

I'm not justifying FTDNA's action. It seems that if GEDmatch is willing to stop using FTDNA kit numbers and generate a different identification of their users, that would solve the problem. Also, as others have pointed out, once we've joined an FTDNA project with a public website or uploaded our raw data to other sites, we've compromised our privacy, not FTDNA. However, that didn't stop the fool from Alaska from blaming FTDNA for his own ill-informed actions.

[georgian1950]

DNA Land is still available as a stopgap (Sorry for the repeat on this thread, but the two threads should be combined)

Including my mother and a speculative match, I am up to four relatives. I also pick up two relatives of relatives,

Alternative? You have to be kidding!

Jack Wyatt

[Armando]

It seems that if GEDmatch is willing to stop using FTDNA kit numbers and generate a different identification of their users, that would solve the problem

It were simply an issue of kit numbers I think that Gedmatch would have been willing to make the change. Instead Gedmatch has stated on their website that the technical obstacles to satisfy FTDNA's current demands are significant. Which to me, means is more than just creating Gedmatch kit numbers based off of the FTDNA kit numbers.

[ech124]

I agree that the "privacy" issue seems to be related to the use of the FTDNA kit number in the Gedmatch ID. FTDNA had to be aware of this because this situation has existed for years. Even though I disagree with FTDNA to suddenly rebel against this, they could be negligent (using their own twisted logic) for ignoring this situation for years. The recent change at Gedmatch to force an email address is bogus because you are allowed to use any email and therefore break any link of the ID and the email as it exists in the FTDNA database.

If FTDNA persists on it's path of thwarting the use of Gedmatch, I suggest that two can play that game. Gedmatch should change their program and assign a random ID to new uploads. In addition, they should replace the upload FTDNA menu option, to something like "Other companies upload". What will FTDNA have to argue about then?

[MMaddi]

It were simply an issue of kit numbers I think that Gedmatch would have been willing to make the change. Instead Gedmatch has stated on their website that the technical obstacles to satisfy FTDNA's current demands are significant. Which to me, means is more than just creating Gedmatch kit numbers based off of the FTDNA kit numbers.

It's clear that FTDNA needs to explain why the sudden change in how they look at their customers uploading Family Finder raw data to GEDmatch. Until FTDNA explains exactly why they are so concerned about this, threatening to sue GEDmatch, we're all in the dark. That's not good for FTDNA or GEDmatch and, especially, for those of us who regard GEDmatch as an important resource in our research.

[DaveInGreece]

Until now I've been allowing USA Customer Support to have a break compared to my time zone. I don't know where customer support is based, but even west coast is now awake and working. ..

Darren, I hope you've had a few strong coffees this morning! And I hope heads are rolling in "management". Please be brave on our behalf and don't tell the managers that there is "some discontent". Tell them the truth: we are pissed and we are going to use other companies.

[MMaddi]

I agree that the "privacy" issue seems to be related to the use of the FTDNA kit number in the Gedmatch ID. FTDNA had to be aware of this because this situation has existed for years. Even though I disagree with FTDNA to suddenly rebel against this, they could be negligent (using their own twisted logic) for ignoring this situation for years. The recent change at Gedmatch to force an email address is bogus because you are allowed to use any email and therefore break any link of the ID and the email as it exists in the FTDNA database.

The point is that the FTDNA kit number becomes associated with a specific person, through an e-mail address. That means that those FTDNA customers who upload to GEDmatch and are also in public projects at FTDNA have lost their privacy. FTDNA has all kinds of privacy safeguards for members of public projects, which are out the window as soon as someone uploads to GEDmatch and gives an e-mail address.

In any event, given the lawsuit against FTDNA, their lawyers have probably made them be hypervigilant about any possibility of a similar lawsuit being filed in the future. All it takes is one or two people who think like the customer from Alaska and FTDNA has a very serious problem.

These are the facts of life. I don't worry much about the privacy issue, with my own DNA results on various websites. However, as a project administrator, I'm as diligent as I can be in the protecting the privacy of project members. If FTDNA and project administrators aren't diligent, it just invites more paranoia and unwillingness to test. Think about that when you are preparing to ask a relative to test to further your research.

My hope is that FTDNA and GEDmatch will be reasonable and arrive at a solution, which doesn't seem to be that difficult, unless there are other issues involved. That's why FTDNA needs to explain their actions. Otherwise, they're just letting all the speculation going on ruin their reputation.