|Do content licensees still incur duplicate content penalties?|
Should legitimate duplicate content be penalized?
| 4:27 am on Apr 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just wondering, since it could impact a current project. With Google and other search engines taking action against duplicate content, how does this work with content sellers? e.g., places that let you use their articles (either for free or for a fee) on your site.
Take the scenario where two competing businesses both find a great article resource, and license the content. You've then got three different, legitimate websites with 60% of their site the same. But won't they incur a duplicate content penalty? That seems unfair.
Take another scenario, where the manufacturer requires you to use their product descriptions on any listings. Then you have every e-commerce site that sells products from that manufacturer with the same content. It's legitimate, but again seems to unfairly get hit by duplicate content penalties.
| 5:07 pm on Apr 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
To the extent that the duplicate content filter affects rankings, it doesn't matter whether the copying is legit. The point, from Google's perspective, is that it doesn't want its SERPs cluttered with the same info over and over again.
How much will trigger a filter is a matter of debate and speculation. But if you're not the first one and you plan to have a page whose content is substantially the same as another one out there, don't expect to rank very high for those particular pages.
| 6:30 pm on Apr 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Take the scenario where two competing businesses both find a great article resource, and license the content. You've then got three different, legitimate websites with 60% of their site the same. But won't they incur a duplicate content penalty? That seems unfair. |
And is it fair for the user to waste time reading the same information three times? That's why Google uses duplicate content filter and the filter shall apply in such a case, unless some tricky methods are used to fool Google.
But duplicate content thing is a filter, not a penalty, so it won't penalize whole site, but just pages with duplicate information.
|Take another scenario, where the manufacturer requires you to use their product descriptions on any listings. Then you have every e-commerce site that sells products from that manufacturer with the same content. It's legitimate, but again seems to unfairly get hit by duplicate content penalties. |
It's legitimate, but Google purpose is not providing free ads for e-commerce, but organising the information. What's the use of duplicate commercial offers in search? If user _wants_ to compare the offers, they can click "repeat the search with the omitted results included".
Google has no reasons to be "fair" with e-commerce. E-commerce affiliate site may be Google customer, if it buys Adwords, or Google competitor, if it doesn't. Why would Google care about their competitors, at the cost of their users?
If I search for information, I don't need repeated results, no matter if they are legitimate or not. And if a duplicate content is illegal, it's an issue for a court, not for duplicate filter.
| 1:59 am on Apr 22, 2005 (gmt 0)|
wizard ... i disagree that the rest of your site will be ok ... i have a few sites that i have added ...note "added" aws book sections too ... was fine for a few months ... now everysingle page on the site is labeled duplicate.
my advice - if you start to see pages getting bagged ... move to improve them.
that said ... i had a 30,000 page show as 100% duplicate, made some minor changes to the templates and got 2 more months of live from them. but i'm noticing a drop once again.
| 2:14 am on Apr 22, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just for giggles I just checked about half of the 60 articles on my site to see if any of my articles (all submitted, all dupes) ranked higher on my site or the author's site, or didn't show up at all.
Most of the time I seem to outrank the author (PR6 gotta love it) if the author is even visible in the results and in the few cases where I didn't rank higher my site was just beneath the author.
So the answer is Google doesn't appear to penalize all duplicate content, it seems to be hit and miss.
| 2:18 am on Apr 22, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think the issue as you frame it might be more a situation where content mix really comes into play.
If 3 sites have substantially the same content and little unique content (other than navigation etc) there may be a greater likelyhood of a duplicate penalty.
But if they each have a significant mix of licensed and unique content on the pages with the licensed/shared content there might well be less risk.
There are many situations where multiple sites might all have the same content (licensed material, for example) that is augmented by a significant amount of content that is unique to each site.
Get the mix of unique and licensed/shared content right and I don't think the risk would be too great.
| 5:20 am on Apr 22, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This is interesting because I've been wondering what to do in my situation.
I have a site about apples and oranges. I recently put up a site about just oranges and would like to put some of the content from the apple and oranges site there, but was worried about duplicate content. The pages rank well on the old site and since the new site is still PR0, I don't think the pages would rank there at all. So what I did was add them for the benefit of my visitors, but put a noindex, nofollow tag in the header to prevent a duplicate content penalty. Do you think that was wise?
| 7:49 am on Apr 22, 2005 (gmt 0)|
take out the NOINDEX and let us know what happens, you tell us :)