People using my content to make Adsense money

Is this Evil?

[loanuniverse]

From time to time I like to take a look at my logs and see who is sending me clicks. Lately, I have noticed a large amount of clicks coming from directory types that are nothing but a selection of links centered around a particular keyword. These “directory” types sites pick a keyword and then import the top ten results for that keyword along with examples of how those keywords are used in each site.

The problem that I see is that these people are running adsense on these pages. I know that some of these sites are very possibly being built by other members here, but I just want to throw in my $0.02 and say that this is being a freeloader, and Google should discourage this practice.

For crying out loud, one page only had one link {mine} and about 70 words extracted from my article.

To make matters worse wathever script they are running creates the subdirectories to fully SEO their pages as in:

Disposable-domain.com/keyword/keyword/crappy-page-with-“borrowed”-content.html

This might make me some enemies, but really…. Isn’t this just a little evil?

I appreciate the links, I probably got a couple of dozen already, but I am willing to live without the couple of hundred referrals.

[Swash]

since the publishing of the hilltop paper it seems everyone is desperately trying to build 'expert' or 'authority' sites. The web has enough directories already imho.

[SlowMove]

The only problem is that there are useful sites that use the exact same linking patterns that you're describing. Blogs using RSS feeds are a good example.
I don't know how it could be done, but there should be some way for sites to let the search engines know that other sites shouldn't be using the content on some pages. That way if excerpts are found along with a link to the page, instant penalty.

[yoyo8]

This is considered keyword spamming and I have been complaining about this for months and months here.

I don't know whether Google actually cares about this or not.

[ChrisKud5]

I think the ODP should stop letting others use its "data". 99% of the time the content is only used to generate traffic and make money, not anything worthwile. The ODP is fine where it is, 10,000 people around the world do not need to copy the data and slap ads on the page to make cash off of our site descriptions...............

ODP has a lot of things to figure out already, i am getting real sick of a lot of things they do and the ways the go about doing it.

[asinah]

I have been affected as well by those websites and many of those sites even don't link to our domains. (They show the url but you can't click on it)

One site that did it with us we reported to google and their 140,000 links were removed from the google index and the Amazon and ebay affiliate providers shut them down as well.

[fclark]

Even worse:
Directory sites built with Keyword + PPC links only!

[gethan]

I'm spending a fair amount of time at the moment reading through [fairuse.stanford.edu ] - Stanford Universities Fair Use Pages, excellent resource.

The use that these directories are being put to, dosen't sound like fair use to me, especially where the link is not really a link. Have there been any test cases in this area yet?

I also think that this runs against the Adsense T&C's - the section about building pages as a vehicle for running Ads only.

Disclaimer: Just personal opinion.

[Marcia]

We've had some LONG discussions on this very thing in the Google News Forum.

IMHO cranking out sites with scraped content isn't legit fair use.

[loanuniverse]

We've had some LONG discussions on this very thing in the Google News Forum.

I read and participated in one of those. I just think that the situation is growing to a point that maybe the Adsense team {which has a different view on this from the SERP team} should take some action.

I noticed this situation a couple of months ago,but only 2 of these sites showed up in my top 50 non-SE referrals. {yesterday, I had 5 in the top 50, probably a couple of dozen if I ran the analyzer with longer parameters}.

I see this as an issue of quality control for Adsense and unfair competition for publishers. There is no way I can compete with a few hundred pages when compared with people that don't have to write anything but the script and can crankout thousands of pages an hour.

[factornumberone]

I think the ODP should stop letting others use its "data". 99% of the time the content is only used to generate traffic and make money, not anything worthwile. The ODP is fine where it is, 10,000 people around the world do not need to copy the data and slap ads on the page to make cash off of our site descriptions...

Have you ever made a search on the Google Directory [directory.google.com]?

[ownerrim]

I've been noticing this same phenomenon in my own area for a while. And it does seem to be growing, particularly since my own area is a niche. I didn't let it bug me too much because I thought, "Hey I'm getting links out of it, even if they're paltry on page rank." Also, it doesn't seem to me that these pages are the kind that are going to show up in rankings. They have minimal to nonexistent page rank. Just the same, I do think these guys are parasites and perform no useful function to users.

[Bluepixel]

Actually google is doing the same thing. They are taking parts of your site and displaying them as search results and add advertisements to make money.
It would be very difficult for an algorithm to make a difference between a real search engine or a human edited directory with additional automatic search engine results (from the own spider), and a script which automatically generates pages for 1000's of keywords from 1000's of 1000's of different sites.

[loanuniverse]

…on the page to make cash off of our site descriptions...

Well just to make it clear, these people go beyond site descriptions, and take excerpts of the text where the keyword is used.

.. "Hey I'm getting links out of it, even if they're paltry on page rank."…

I do appreciate the links, but the price is too high IMHO. Frankly Adsense revenue is not that much when compared to my day-job, but lets face it {these people are in direct competition for the advertiser’s dollars and they are using what I wrote to make money}. I think most people would be understandably upset.

I received a couple of sticky emails telling me that I should report the sites to Adsense support. But I have a couple of questions…

1)Do you think that what these people are doing is wrong?

And

2) Would you report them if you were in my situation?

[kwngian]

loanuniverse,

Google do take action on this kind of report.

I did report once for one directory site that is using false outbound links to get themselve high in SERP for a particular search term and they disappear from the SERP within 1-2 weeks.

They still have PR but just no longer have first page ranking.

[Bluepixel]

What would false outbound links be? Or how would they be ok? Does it have to be a Location:url\n\n redirect or a meta redirect?

[kwngian]

What I encountered is outbound link that are not redirecting to the destination site at all. Just %URL% on the link. So if you click on it, you stay on the same page.

It is done on the sole purpose of fooling google into believing that it is linking out to authoritative sites.

[Macro]

I know that some of these sites are very possibly being built by other members here, but I just want to throw in my $0.02 and say that this is being a freeloader, and Google should discourage this practice.

I don't agree with you. "Freeloader" is a nice cuddly term in comparison to what we should be calling these sewer scum.

It has been argued elsewhere that they are legitimate directories and people (like Bluepixel) try to confuse them with the SEs themselves. There are distinctions - very clear distinctions.

1. Intent: Search engines want to send me traffic if I have the right content. That's the purpose of their existence. The scum sites want to attract traffic that would otherwise be destined for me i.e. the purpose of their existence is to steal my traffic.

2. Method: Search engines trawl my site, pick up pages and rank them based on how relevent they think my content is. They are geared towards helping the searcher find what he's looking for. The scum sites are not designed to help you find anything. They are only interested in showing up in SERPS for a particular topic, attracting the traffic and getting them to click Adsense ads.

3. Control: I am the one who controls the pages the SEs and reputable directories show from my site. If I request them via a robots.txt, or an email, they will remove my page from their index. The scum sites don't. They control what they show from my site. They have neither my permission, nor do they respect my request to remove my "listing".

4. Content: The content of SEs is the quality of their results/their algo/their search features. The content of the sewer scum sites is.... property that I own.

I haven't reported them so far but... that's a good idea. Who do we report them to? Does Google take reports against the sewerscum sites seriously? I don't think it's difficult for an algo to pick out these sites. They have some common features that the PhD boffins at Google should have no trouble figuring out.

[digitalv]

We've had some LONG discussions on this very thing in the Google News Forum.

IMHO cranking out sites with scraped content isn't legit fair use.

When you think about it, isn't that what GOOGLE is? Google is nothing without all of the "scraped content" from sites they've indexed. How could they ethically penalize someone for doing the exact same thing THEY do?

[jomaxx]

I've seen several discussions of these kinds of sites in the Google News forum. I'm sure that Google is aware of this technique and would love to eliminate it. These sites have zero true content and add nothing to the user experience, merely cluttering up the SERP's.

[Rodney]

When you think about it, isn't that what GOOGLE is? Google is nothing without all of the "scraped content" from sites they've indexed. How could they ethically penalize someone for doing the exact same thing THEY do?

I think Marco pointed out some very important differences in his post (see post #18 in this thread right above yours).

Namely, the webmaster can control whether they want their content in google or not via a robots.txt or an email to google (or using their online form).

These content theft sites have no way of opting out. Also, their "intent" is very questionable.

I think it's worth reporting to the google adsense team at a minimum. That doesn't mean that they will be removing the site, but at least it'll get a review.

You could do that by clicking on the "Ads by Google" on that site in particular or by just contacting them using the Contact link once you login to adsense.

Present your findings and let them decide what to do with it (if anything).

[digitalv]

Yeah, his post wasn't there when I started typing mine though - very good points, I withdraw my comment :)

[ChrisKud5]

"Have you ever made a search on the Google Directory? "

I am not sure what you mean here, but why does google have to copy the ODP Data? They are trying to make money off of it just like any other ho dunk "directory" site is. What gives google any more of the right to take ODP data and use it for their benefit?

By the way, a search on the google directory is nothing different than a search on google, it displays SERPs just like any othe google search, and it displays adwords just like any other google search.

The Google directory is a copy of the ODP, heck, it even looks EXACTLY the same. The ODPs policy of freely giving out the data is the root of the problem, people copy it and make a buck off of someobody elses work and other peoples content and sites. Google is not exempt from this, why do they need a "personal" copy of the ODP data that is usually months out of date?

[yoyo8]

Two additonal points:

1. These sites are different from search engines in the sense that they are taking content from other sites and ARCHIVING it STATICALLY so that they get indexed by search engines themselves.

2. Some of these sites are legitimate sites and place these pages in a semi-secret place not meant to be viewed by general visitors. They are soley meant to catch SE traffic. To see, try going to the main domain for some of these sites and see if it's then possible to easily get back to the results listings again.

I have encountered hundreds of these sites containing my content and some do rank well. I wish both adsense AND google would do more to discourage this kind of practice, ie kick them out of adsense AND penalize their search results.

[loanuniverse]

...The Google directory is a copy of the ODP, heck, it even looks EXACTLY the same. The ODPs policy of freely giving out the data is the root of the problem...

Good point, but these sites are not using the ODP data. Also there are no ads in the Google directory pages only when you initiate the search do you get adword ads.

The ODP concept is good.

I am personally still debating sending adsense support an email. Going to wait until after I see my June logs.

[annej]

For crying out loud, one page only had one link {mine} and about 70 words extracted from my article.

That is really over the edge.

I see this as an issue of quality control for Adsense and unfair competition for publishers.

Google's letting these sites use AdSense has make AdSense look like spam which hurts it's reputation for legit publishers. The only thing I can think of is that Google wants the money so badly so their finances will look good for their IPO. It isn't good long range business though.

I am not sure what you mean here, but why does google have to copy the ODP Data?

I wish they would quit. I have a site that Google gives a 3 year old and very outdated description from ODP. I have tried for years to get ODP to update it with no response.

[ownerrim]

LV, I wonder if the dividing line might be whether or not these sites are actually "lifting" (stealing) word-for-word content from other sites. Of course, you could just report these opportunists (in nature, this is a parasite) to google and let them make the call.

[ownerrim]

actually, I really think you should report them. This kind of stuff does not make for great advertiser leads and, by extension, is ultimately not good for the majority of publishers either.

[Sharper]

Isn't the point of the ODP the "open" part where they let anyone use or publish their directory? It's their work, while I'm not using any of their "content" anywhere personally, I certainly respect their right to give what they've created away, regardless of the commercial or non-commercial use it's put to.

I can see being upset about the guy copying part of your page and making cash with it (I would be too), but it would be a different matter if you (like the ODP) had created and published for the specific purpose of people copying it with proper attribution.

[paybacksa]

I hate spammy directories as much as the next gal, but I have been looking for a new home lately and I am finding these so-called "scum" websites are often better than Google fpr producing relevant content and on-target ads.

Try to find meaningful school reports these days... the SERPs are flooded with overly commercial, realtor-driven leased-content sites that force you thru all sorts of signups only to end up giving you the free Dept of Ed census data -- 3 years old and poorly organized at that!

I'd say the AdWords ads I have been clicking on have been extremely helpful to me.. I never would have found the genuine school comparison sites in all the SERP garbage if it were not for those directory sites running AdSense.