Sign up  |   |   |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
woobadooba

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #1 
So far I have had two encounters with content thieves.  As a result of this I've found a simple, but effective way to deal with them. 

Just simply go to Google's Spam Report feature and make it known that they have duplicated your content, and have thus violated the copyright on it.  Be sure to provide them with a link to the original; and don't forget to express your feelings in the comment area.

It is likely that Google will remove their website from the search engine, or at the very least they will remove the page upon which the copyright infringement has taken place.

I hope this bit of information helps you when you need it.   
    

__________________
If Copyright Thieves Steal Your Words, Then Report Them to Google Spam. It Works!
stapel

Registered:
Posts: 140
Reply with quote  #2 
Quote:
Originally Posted by woobadooba
...go to Google's Spam Report feature....

Note: The form mentioned above is located here.

Note: If the page moves later, so the above link no longer works, try Googling "spam report google" (without the quote-marks).

Eliz.

jeffhall

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #3 

Using Googles spam report of the DMCA procedures can porduce results - but the fact remains that it is Google who are re-publishing the stolen content in the first place.


__________________
s
stapel

Registered:
Posts: 140
Reply with quote  #4 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffhall
...the fact remains that it is Google who are re-publishing the stolen content in the first place.

Um... No, not generally.

The plagiariser's site is doing the "republishing"; it is highly unlikely that the plagiariser's site is owned by Google. Google is instead (erroneously) providing a link to the "republished" work.

Eliz.

moonshine

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #5 
Mister reasonable, just.....

I  found that a friend in a similar business had copied a footer onto a couple of his pages, and i had been using the same footer almost site-wide for a couple of years.
we do co-operate in business, and have a good relationship as many businesses do. He's pretty new to e-selling, we are nearly nine years online now.  I dont want him penalised by google, however i would like my "natural" search place restored.

my index page went from google page 1 position 1, 2 or 3, to page 2.  The index page is the landing page for a product that is a significant regular selling product.

The irritating thing is he has removed it, although its still in the cache, but i still appear penalised with very poor search placements.

Do you think I will continue to be penalised if i keep the original footer,  even though the copyist has removed it from his site now?

Just a gripe, but would it be so difficult for google to detect which site had the content on it FIRST, the de-facto original?  Duh, they seem to have a mysterious algorithm for everything else so it beggars belief that they seem not to actually give a damn who had the orginal content.....

Or do you think the fact that the copyist is also an adword customer makes a difference? 

__________________
only bikers know why dogs really stick their heads out of car windows
stapel

Registered:
Posts: 140
Reply with quote  #6 
On what basis did you conclude that your site dropped down below ten or twenty other sites because of some minor overlap with just one of those sites?

It is the general understanding that Google's "hits" are served on the basis of relevance, Page Rank, "authority", and similar considerations. I can't imagine how a copyright notice, "Contact" link, and similar page-footer boilerplate would affect one's ranking, since this portion of the page contains little or no "content".

As for "who published first", there is no way for the Googlebot to know.

For instance, Author A could have written an article five years ago, and this was copied by Domain B. Author A's site expired, and the "original" went offline. When Author A reposts, his original text now looks "copied". But the expiration of his domain did not void his copyright, nor did it chance the facts of authorship.

Another problem comes when an author revises, updates, appends to, or otherwise edits his text. Suppose Author A publishes an article in preliminary form ("more information as it becomes available", say), and then Domain B scrapes it. Later, Author A corrects three typoes, provides an informational link, and adds new text, doubling the length of the article and bringing the topic up-to-date. Domain B's copy now has an older server date (probably being the date of the scrape). These server dates could be viewed as "proving" that the scraper "came first".

Personally, I wouldn't want to "lose out" to scrapers any time I corrected a typo!

Eliz

moonshine

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #7 

hi Stapel,
thanks for your input.

my conclusion was drawn by a process of elimination, but only as best as one can in these circumstances.
a mystery drop from number one on page one, the page with the duplicate original content vanished from the goolge published backlinks, a page rank change from PR3 to PR2 on the secondary site. (the copied site)

Unfortunately most other pages on other sites, which appeared to have been "supported" by links from the copied site have also dropped in page rank.

I have a couple of sites using this and similar footers, which I rotate at various times of the year depending on what we are selling at that particular time of the season.

It is exactly as you have summised, actually.

The copyist took the phrases etc, and put them on his site. In the interim we changed to another footer.  When we came round again to use our footer, the one which had been copied, his page was syill in the cache, although it had been removed from his live web site, so a real-time comparison by a human eyeball would have shown no duplicate content.

The footers were not generic in type (email/contact/about us etc) but were usually a listing of some products and services available which we promote at the time.
eg at christmas we make a lot ofmemorabilia frames, at other times of year (soccer season) we make a lot of football shirt frames, around october we tend to make a lot of medal cases,  at the time of the london marathon we also promote medal cases etc.

So i see your point re google not detecting which was there first.  By taking something off a site temporarily, we effectively allow google to think that when ours does appear again, it is us that have copied it.


I guess the irony of this is that if you want to knobble a competitor, you simply copy a page he updates regularly, then when he updates, he becomes a copyist in SEO terms.

So i guess in future we'll just add pages, rather than update them, and clutter the web with out dated pages that naturally get dropped from google searches due to lack of updates.....

you have shed light on it, thanks!


__________________
only bikers know why dogs really stick their heads out of car windows
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.