IS there really any such thing as content duplication penalty???

I am wondering if there is really a content duplication penalty by google to those who use duplicate content??

If yes: then how does google know that who is the original writer and who is the ripper?? suppose i write an article on my blog, which is unknown to google, then someone copies my content to his blog, which is regularly crawled by google. Then one day google visits my site and finds there is similarity in the content of both our site.Who will be penalised then??

If no: Then how did this notion that google can punish u for content duplication start??

 

First indexed normally has first priority. Also, someone using your content and linking back to the author also tells the search engines which page is original.

You should be pinging Google, Yahoo, Live, etc. after each post. That will get them to index your content first.

 

I don't know if there really is. And if they are working on it, I don't see how they can possibly get their computers to enforce it. There are, how many tens of millions of sites out there?

Type it in, along with "google." They may have piece on it.

For me, I never looked into it. Who cares. A writer can get many, many, MANY times more readers from submitting that one same article to dozens of sites. I know, for a fact, that less than a few hundred come in from engines.

On top of that, you have to be lucky enough EVEN be on page one to begin with!

Also, in 60 seconds you can easily change the wording around a bit, and Google's computers won't even know.

"Duplicate content"? Give me a break.

Dottio on what snowbird said.

 

Google have been buying out a lot of specialist companies in this field and have amalgamated their algorithm's extremely well. Your whole site will be indexed and the article has to fit in with the content.

JohnT

 

Which means, lazy re-writers who copy off from other people, beware, i have lots of confidence with google. they dont want to end up like msn.

 

Being first to publish an article is no guarantee that Google will recognise you as the original. It also will take into account the rank of the pages involved. If yours is of low rank and the other site is a huge popular site it will accept that as the original.

They do penalise anyone who copy’s work, the page in the signature below is well established but will never have any page rank or be near the first 2 or 3 pages in my subject. This is because everything on it was commissioned by a client and is a duplicate of the work I performed for them and has already been published.

Below is part of an article I wrote for Wikipedia.

There are several other infringements considered to bring the wroth of the Google God’s down upon mere mortal’s heads. Most of them are fairly self explanatory, the Duplicate content penalty, may, or may not result from duplication of someone else’s work, but can come from publishing an article that contains the same content as found on your site.

This basically means that although your site was the first to publish the article, Wikipedia or ezine is far more respected by Google so they will accept theirs as the original regardless of who was first to publish.

If your site is mostly copied they will take the following action against your site.
From my same article for Wiki.

Another penalty that is well documented is the 950 rank loss penalty, like to -30 penalty, the -950 is in reality just a number. It relates to the perception that a site may drop 950 places in the rankings.

In actual fact this drop will equate to a free fall all the way to the very bottom of the search engine listings for a specific keyword. This of course can be a complete disaster for any site that is intended to produce an income by being found in the highest levels of a search for a specific keyword.

 

first indexed, not submitted is the one that gets "credit"..

 

The version of the article that is on the best-trusted site will get credited. That may be the first site that has it, but it can also be based on how old each site is, the type of host it is on etc. The version(s) that do not get trusted, will often not be found within miles of the front page in the serps.

 

I wondered about the duplicate content penalty as well. If having duplicate content can hurt your site, why do webmasters use articles from article directories? But the way you all explained it here, it makes a bit more sense now.

 

Its a false assumption that the articles from article directories are helpful. In fact quite the opposite. Google will penalize if the article is all over the web which is what happens to these free articles.

JohnT

 

Because they don't care about it, because, basically, the same reason I said above.

 

Oh but I have a friend who owns an author site and someone on that site duplicated some content and put it up. The site was blocked from Google over a week. You may not get noticed, but then again you might.

 

I have seen many people submitiing same articles to many ezine sites..so if i submit the same article to ezinearticles, articleblast, articleblast etc..then will they incur the wrath of google too??

 

lol he's all yours, folks.

 

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-illustrated-guide-to-duplicate-content-in-the-search-engineshttp://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-illustrated-guide-to-duplicate-content-in-the-search-engines

 

Is it bad? Yes.

There's no way to answer that question with certainty. Do engines have duplicate content penalties? Yes.

Do they always catch everything? No.

Is the part of the content you didn't modify going to still be considered duplicate? Maybe.

Will it affect your rankings? Maybe not.

Oh wait... seems like heard this before. Ooo! Deja Vu!

 

WIth what i've heard there are no duplicate content penalties that affect your SEO.

 

for a Wikipedia editor Ineedcontent is suprisingly right.
The duplicate content penalty works on the basis that if google sees 2 identical blocks of phrase it may choose to index one but not the other. Which one depends on the trust factor of the URL so it is quite possible to copy someones content from a PR0 page and publish it in one of your PR4 pages and see your page indexed and theirs thrown out. In the seo industry it is a common tactic for getting rid of smaller competition by using dummy sites with fake ownership details. In my experience Google did not want to get involved in copyright disputes so to play it safe, they threw out both sites - mission accomplished

 

Back in the days webmasters were just that, webmasters. They werent cheapos who wanted to just earn money. The new breed of "webmasters" are really disappointing. Only thinking about article stealing and such