Mr. Mungus, please don't fall into the trap of extracting a single phrase from an essay and challenging it. Thoughtfulness is required.
You have added an illustration to my point.
The algorithm results were disappointing.
You clicked on a paid ad from a disappointing page.
The advertiser had what you wanted.
What if: You landed on a scraper site from the algorithm results. You saw the paid ad and clicked on it because the scraper site was so disappointing. You landed on the ORIGINAL site from which the scraper had taken their content but not the services or goods being offered by the "real" site. You have already been poisoned by experiencing disappointment with the same content on the scraper site. Are you going to investigate the second, "real" site with the same content as the scraper, or are you going to continue to hunt?
My bet is that you continue to hunt, as the original site's content is not "trustworthy" anymore. Heck, maybe you even think the "real" site is the scraper, now, further devaluing its content. It never had a chance to make its sale.
"Real" sites WRITE content to give value to their visitors and to support what they are selling. They cooperate with others in the interests of promoting the products or services they sell. They "make" things that provide value to others.
Search engines, in cooperation with "real" site developers and owners, provide a simple means for people who are seeking what the sites offer to connect with those sites. They "make" connections that pass on "trust" and "confidence" to the businesses that engage them.
Scrapers steal content so they have a place to sell ads. They cooperate only with the ad providers. They don't "make" anything except deception.
Nobody in the "real" world has any of their advertising budget set aside for gaining placements on scraper sites, because those sites do, indeed, cause the experience with a visitor who comes from them to be less "trustworthy" than visitors who come to them directly from a "trustworthy" search portal with whom the site has chosen to do business, like Google.
I do not want ads for my websites to be on a porn site any more than I want them to be on a scraper site. Neither has proven to have any positive impact on my business, and, in fact, visitors who come from such links have never converted. This is a negative impact.
When the level of trust is low (online buying) it is pushed lower with every deception (scrapers) until finally, when the "real" online businesses capture a visitor who has lost trust, the copyrighted original content on those "real" sites is NOT percieved in the same way as it would have been had the deceptions never been encountered.
Ergo sum, the copyrighted original content has been devalued through no fault of its own, but rather through the actions of the scraper site(s) that lowered the trust factor in the incoming visitor.
Mr. Mungus, would you please make your argument that scraper sites do NOT devalue the copyrighted original content on sites they (literally) steal the fodder from that they use to trigger AdSense blocks?
It would be nice to engage in a dialog.
The difference between search engines and scraper sites is the same as the difference between movie trailers paid for by the movie production companies and pirated tapes made by sneaking a video camera into the theater and taping a film from between your knees. In both cases, the former are activities necessary to the promotion of the business (film) and the latter is outright theft of intellectual property in an attempt to make a quick buck with a low-quality product stolen from its creator.