Yes, this is annoying. I believe there are a fw systems around that allow you to systamticaly identify content stealers, but do you really want to spend all of your time phoneing up people who have stolen your content?
One idea I cam up with to try and combat this was to use JavaScript so that when someone tries to copy text from your page the text that is copied is reveresed of scrambled. Hopefully that would put most people of, but any programers who really want to steal your content will probably realise whats going on.
You could always go back to the days of those old right click disabling scripts to stop people who don't realise that you can just go to edit copy.
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
Sploggers are getting your content from your feed, or from Technorati, so that doesn't really help.
Google Reader can be used to refeed to splogs and who in their right mind is going to block the most popular feed reader?
Mutiny Design
· 2 years ago
Yes, this is annoying. I believe there are a fw systems around that allow you to systamticaly identify content stealers, but do you really want to spend all of your time phoneing up people who have stolen your content?
One idea I cam up with to try and combat this was to use JavaScript so that when someone tries to copy text from your page the text that is copied is reveresed of scrambled. Hopefully that would put most people of, but any programers who really want to steal your content will probably realise whats going on.
You could always go back to the days of those old right click disabling scripts to stop people who don't realise that you can just go to edit copy.
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
Sploggers are getting your content from your feed, or from Technorati, so that doesn't really help.
Google Reader can be used to refeed to splogs and who in their right mind is going to block the most popular feed reader?
Jonathan Bailey
· 2 years ago
Excellent article on the topic, but one thing I wanted to point out though is that it doesn't take long to deal with plagiarism once you know how to handle it. If you take the time to have your stock letters ready, it never takes more than fifteen minutes on your end to handle a case.
Something to consider when dealing with this complicated issue. Sometimes, much of the time even, it is worthwhile to after content theft.
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
Johnathan I am glad you appreciated the alternative view on the subject. I honestly think people get a little riled up about it thinking these sites are stealing all their traffic.
They might be stealing some traffic, but at the same time they also send some you wouldn't otherwise receive.
If I took 15 minutes to deal with every blog that is syndicating my content without explicit permission, it would probably take me more than a week, and I would loose literally 1000s of backlinks (though poor quality)
There are actually people making large amounts of money exploiting splogs and MFA scrapers.
Jonathan Bailey
· 2 years ago
Excellent article on the topic, but one thing I wanted to point out though is that it doesn't take long to deal with plagiarism once you know how to handle it. If you take the time to have your stock letters ready, it never takes more than fifteen minutes on your end to handle a case.
Something to consider when dealing with this complicated issue. Sometimes, much of the time even, it is worthwhile to after content theft.
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
Johnathan I am glad you appreciated the alternative view on the subject. I honestly think people get a little riled up about it thinking these sites are stealing all their traffic.
They might be stealing some traffic, but at the same time they also send some you wouldn't otherwise receive.
If I took 15 minutes to deal with every blog that is syndicating my content without explicit permission, it would probably take me more than a week, and I would loose literally 1000s of backlinks (though poor quality)
There are actually people making large amounts of money exploiting splogs and MFA scrapers.
Alex
· 2 years ago
Great post. I really enjoy your writing. By the way, I run a big Article Directory and if you have some articles for distribution, you are very welcome to post them in the appropriate category. Regards, Alex
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
Alex, how many junk article directories do you actually own which you promote with exactly the same comment on multiple blogs?
Alex
· 2 years ago
Great post. I really enjoy your writing. By the way, I run a big Article Directory and if you have some articles for distribution, you are very welcome to post them in the appropriate category. Regards, Alex
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
Alex, how many junk article directories do you actually own which you promote with exactly the same comment on multiple blogs?
Recording Studio
· 2 years ago
Andy, the entire premise of your post is to benefit from the links within the content that is copied by others. But I have faced situations wherein someone has happily copied my content and taken the trouble to remove all the links from within it. What do you do of such people then?
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
I am fairly confident that most of my articles wouldn't make much sense without the links provided although I am sure that isn't universally the case.
A significant proportion of my content is unique ideas and research, and what stands out most is when real blogs I read pick up on those ideas without any kind of link, discussing subjects as if the subject is some kind of universal truth, but with no real experience in the subject matter.
As a rule I generally ignore that as well. I have grown a thick skin, and I know from article marketing that this happens all the time.
Even with sploggers 80:20 applies - in many cases they are more likely to link to you for a pingback and a chance of a link, but have the link with nofollow. As far as Google is concerned that is the same as if they hadn't linked to you at all.
If you are a large site, and can afford to outsource chasing people down, you might take a different approach, but for most it is better to just use it as an additional weapon.
Recording Studio
· 2 years ago
Andy, the entire premise of your post is to benefit from the links within the content that is copied by others. But I have faced situations wherein someone has happily copied my content and taken the trouble to remove all the links from within it. What do you do of such people then?
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
I am fairly confident that most of my articles wouldn't make much sense without the links provided although I am sure that isn't universally the case.
A significant proportion of my content is unique ideas and research, and what stands out most is when real blogs I read pick up on those ideas without any kind of link, discussing subjects as if the subject is some kind of universal truth, but with no real experience in the subject matter.
As a rule I generally ignore that as well. I have grown a thick skin, and I know from article marketing that this happens all the time.
Even with sploggers 80:20 applies - in many cases they are more likely to link to you for a pingback and a chance of a link, but have the link with nofollow. As far as Google is concerned that is the same as if they hadn't linked to you at all.
If you are a large site, and can afford to outsource chasing people down, you might take a different approach, but for most it is better to just use it as an additional weapon.
Jonathan Bailey
· 2 years ago
One potential thought then, why not use a Creative Commons License on your content and give the implicit OK for anyone who wants to use your material in such a way. I do not find such use terribly offensive myself, so long as I am linked and attributed, I have mentioned that on my site and have an appropriate CC license.
Any thoughts on that?
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
I much prefer GPL, that allows people to modify parts, add commentary or maybe change a heading with a lot more freedom
I should point out that your feeds do not contain any license information, and the lack of contact information could make you liable to fines up to $500,000 NZD, which is approximately $350,000 USD. Your content is commercial, and I am sure it gets transmitted by means other than RSS, such as email subscribers
I have been writing about Feedburner being somewhat of a legal liability for some time, though users will subscribe to stuff using their own methods, and could quite easily still hit a spam button.
Jonathan Bailey
· 2 years ago
One potential thought then, why not use a Creative Commons License on your content and give the implicit OK for anyone who wants to use your material in such a way. I do not find such use terribly offensive myself, so long as I am linked and attributed, I have mentioned that on my site and have an appropriate CC license.
Any thoughts on that?
AndyBeard
· 2 years ago
I much prefer GPL, that allows people to modify parts, add commentary or maybe change a heading with a lot more freedom
I should point out that your feeds do not contain any license information, and the lack of contact information could make you liable to fines up to $500,000 NZD, which is approximately $350,000 USD. Your content is commercial, and I am sure it gets transmitted by means other than RSS, such as email subscribers
I have been writing about Feedburner being somewhat of a legal liability for some time, though users will subscribe to stuff using their own methods, and could quite easily still hit a spam button.
All Comments
One idea I cam up with to try and combat this was to use JavaScript so that when someone tries to copy text from your page the text that is copied is reveresed of scrambled. Hopefully that would put most people of, but any programers who really want to steal your content will probably realise whats going on.
You could always go back to the days of those old right click disabling scripts to stop people who don't realise that you can just go to edit copy.
Google Reader can be used to refeed to splogs and who in their right mind is going to block the most popular feed reader?
One idea I cam up with to try and combat this was to use JavaScript so that when someone tries to copy text from your page the text that is copied is reveresed of scrambled. Hopefully that would put most people of, but any programers who really want to steal your content will probably realise whats going on.
You could always go back to the days of those old right click disabling scripts to stop people who don't realise that you can just go to edit copy.
Google Reader can be used to refeed to splogs and who in their right mind is going to block the most popular feed reader?
Something to consider when dealing with this complicated issue. Sometimes, much of the time even, it is worthwhile to after content theft.
They might be stealing some traffic, but at the same time they also send some you wouldn't otherwise receive.
If I took 15 minutes to deal with every blog that is syndicating my content without explicit permission, it would probably take me more than a week, and I would loose literally 1000s of backlinks (though poor quality)
There are actually people making large amounts of money exploiting splogs and MFA scrapers.
Something to consider when dealing with this complicated issue. Sometimes, much of the time even, it is worthwhile to after content theft.
They might be stealing some traffic, but at the same time they also send some you wouldn't otherwise receive.
If I took 15 minutes to deal with every blog that is syndicating my content without explicit permission, it would probably take me more than a week, and I would loose literally 1000s of backlinks (though poor quality)
There are actually people making large amounts of money exploiting splogs and MFA scrapers.
Regards,
Alex
Regards,
Alex
A significant proportion of my content is unique ideas and research, and what stands out most is when real blogs I read pick up on those ideas without any kind of link, discussing subjects as if the subject is some kind of universal truth, but with no real experience in the subject matter.
As a rule I generally ignore that as well. I have grown a thick skin, and I know from article marketing that this happens all the time.
Even with sploggers 80:20 applies - in many cases they are more likely to link to you for a pingback and a chance of a link, but have the link with nofollow. As far as Google is concerned that is the same as if they hadn't linked to you at all.
If you are a large site, and can afford to outsource chasing people down, you might take a different approach, but for most it is better to just use it as an additional weapon.
A significant proportion of my content is unique ideas and research, and what stands out most is when real blogs I read pick up on those ideas without any kind of link, discussing subjects as if the subject is some kind of universal truth, but with no real experience in the subject matter.
As a rule I generally ignore that as well. I have grown a thick skin, and I know from article marketing that this happens all the time.
Even with sploggers 80:20 applies - in many cases they are more likely to link to you for a pingback and a chance of a link, but have the link with nofollow. As far as Google is concerned that is the same as if they hadn't linked to you at all.
If you are a large site, and can afford to outsource chasing people down, you might take a different approach, but for most it is better to just use it as an additional weapon.
Any thoughts on that?
I should point out that your feeds do not contain any license information, and the lack of contact information could make you liable to fines up to $500,000 NZD, which is approximately $350,000 USD.
Your content is commercial, and I am sure it gets transmitted by means other than RSS, such as email subscribers
http://www.netconcepts.com/nz-anti-spam-act/
I have been writing about Feedburner being somewhat of a legal liability for some time, though users will subscribe to stuff using their own methods, and could quite easily still hit a spam button.
Any thoughts on that?
I should point out that your feeds do not contain any license information, and the lack of contact information could make you liable to fines up to $500,000 NZD, which is approximately $350,000 USD.
Your content is commercial, and I am sure it gets transmitted by means other than RSS, such as email subscribers
http://www.netconcepts.com/nz-anti-spam-act/
I have been writing about Feedburner being somewhat of a legal liability for some time, though users will subscribe to stuff using their own methods, and could quite easily still hit a spam button.