First of all, I don't think you're using the right terms, so it's really hard to understand what you're talking about. PLR (assuming you mean articles) are content; not copy. So it really doesn't have anything to do with copywriters. Essentially though, PLR rights depend on the PLR writer / seller, and what rights they grant with purchase. Generally it's something along these lines, unless stated otherwise: 1. The copyright still belongs to the creator; not the buyer (it's not possible to transfer the copyright for the same work to multiple buyers, and with PLR, the writer has the right to sell multiple copies). 2. The buyer can generally claim authorship. 3. The buyer can generally edit the articles or compile them into another format (such as putting several together into e-book form). Generally, it's a smart idea to edit them, because then you don't get penalized for duplicate content. Other than that, you really need to read the license for the actual PLR articles you plan to buy. Some offer resell rights, and others don't. Some let you post as-is to article directories and similar sites and others require they be edited first. Terms depend on the seller.
I mean't Private Label Rights by PLR. I am a new comer. You probably understood it from my question. So PLR applies only in content writing. Not in copy writing. Am I correct. Thanks a lot for the reply!!
In most cases, PLR applies to content writing. I've never seen PLR copy, but by definition it can (and may) exist. Because of the nature of copy, it could be difficult for buyers to use it or benefit from it or both.
PLR can apply to all sorts of stuff--a software program for instance. The rights given to a buyer depend on the giver. There's no standard per se. So, don't assume that you have X,Y,Z as rights unless noted, because that's not correct. Should you buy rights to something, read the license.
This word 'copy' is so confusing. On a newspaper, 'copy' is the content. Jimmy Olsen was a 'copy boy'. You send your 'copy' to the editor. Yet 'copywriting' doesn't refer to writing such 'copy', but to writing sales or motivational pieces. No wonder people have so much trouble learning English!
Here's the simple explanation: "Content" is generally used to inform, educate, or entertain. "Copy" is generally used to incite some kind of action (could be to get someone to buy something, sign up as a member, subscribe to a newsletter, click a link or ad, request a quote, or even come back again later).
They can't always be used in "any way you like." For example, many (if not most) don't let you post them to article directories as-is; they make you edit them first. Some offer resale rights and others don't. etc. Even if you buy PLR, read the terms of use... they can vary a good bit.
Just wanted to add that, in most cases, the only reason you can't post to an article directory as-is is because most article directories don't allow duplicate submissions. That provision is in the buyers' best interests.
Understanding copy, content or cowboy boots isn't really a requirement for making money. If you buy PLR content and get rewrite rights, it's always in your best interest to rewrite the article. SEs will like you more and as Latoya mentioned, your submissions to article sites will fly through.
Yes, if you buy PLR articles you really MUST rewrite them at least 50% or so or the directories will decline them. PLR content can be articles, ebooks, websites etc. They all have different rules so you always have to read what the seller is allowing before you buy it. I've bought PLR content before only to open up the license file and it to have more restrictions than I would have ever agreed to. Like you cannot submit to article directories even if you make substantial changes! What? How can they have that rule? What if you change it 80% isn't it them so unique that it's now yours?
The answer is no. You can modify it to your heart's content. However, you're simply creating a derivative work and not an original work. Therefore, it's under whatever license you have--like it or not. It's like the idiots who rewrite news stories. They are technically infringing on copyright. Unless they do a whole new article only using facts that is. And most don't seem to know the difference between a fact and something that may be true but exclusive to a source, like a quote.
The rights are the same which the original author sets on 'em. So if you are looking for the rights of something, then to be on the safer side, contact the original author or the atleast get a copy from the original author, which states all the rights. ~G
Rewriting something 1% or even 100% doesn't make it yours. If the copyright owner doesn't give you consent to use it in a particular way, you can't (legally) do it.
Sorry, I'll beg to differ on your 100% statement. Otherwise, you DON'T own the copyright on your article Money Rule #1: Don't Spend More Than You Make after all, the central idea was expressed by Charles Dickens - As Mr Micawber put it "Income 20 shillings, outgoings 20 shillings and sixpence, result misery!" Or maybe someone else, if you want to claim that Dickens copyright has expired - Someone somewhere has to have written a similar theme within the eligibile period for copyright. If you do rewrite it 100% i.e use the core idea but express it in your own words, who owns the copyright? The problem lies in people defining rewrite as "change one or a few of the words to a synonym" or "change the order of the sentences". That isn't rewriting, that's a botch copy and paste, find and replace job that doesn't confer any copyright. As a writer, I would NOT call that rewriting; would you? PS : I liked your article, btw - and am not contesting your copyright, just using it for an example.