Should we 301 a domain that used to hold duplicate content?

Client loves the domain-- but is it tainted?

[jastra]

It turns out that a new SEO client has a duplicate site under a second domain name. The duplicate site is an exact mirror image.

The duplicate site has no incoming links. The main site does have a few backlinks.

The duplicate site does not appear in search results when searching a unique textual phrase within quotes. Only the main site appears in the results.

Search results only return the main site when searching the exact keyword in the identical <title> tags.

The client wants to use the domain that has the duplicate site. Shouldn't we refrain rom 301 redirecting it because it's "tainted"?

Should we just let it die?

[jastra]

Sorry-- should have mentioned that the duplicate site was created in December 2008.

The main site was created almost two years earlier.

[incrediblehelp]

What is the reasoning for wanting to use the dup domain? I would strongly consider using the current and then killing the dup site.

[g1smd]

Redirect to one domain. Fix both www and non-www URLs on all domains.

[Robert Charlton]

The client wants to use the domain that has the duplicate site. Shouldn't we refrain rom 301 redirecting it because it's "tainted"?

Dupe content doesn't "taint" a domain. Dupe content gets filtered, not penalized.

By redirecting the second domain to the main domain as g1smd suggests, you eliminate the dupe problem.

And since the first domain is already the one that's coming up for searches, and it's older and more established, redirecting the second domain to the first one is a better choice than redirecting the first to the second.

[jastra]

Thanks for the comments. I needed to get reminded that duplicate content isn't a penalty.