I know that G doesn't like double content. I'm going to create a blog where I plan to publish a collection of articles (edu-related) found in internet. Just like an attempt to gather them all in one place and to let all visitors using them free, of course. Non-commercial, educational purposes only. All these articles are somewhere located, as it will be the collection of internet sources. Now I'm coming with the question that disturbs me and makes me mad. E.g. Article 1 can be found on website 1, website 2, website 3. ALl different websites, claiming they distribute it for free, and call it a "free" article. Is it ok for my blog to publish this article as well (also free, of course) and will G consider it as a duplicate content? I mean, what about the copyright issues and so on? As I've said, these articles can be found on different websites, and they are free ones. Anycase, I've placed the disclaimer that all these articles are published under 'fair use' doctrine of the copyright law. Am I right? Will Google consider it ok?
Even 'free' articles usually need a link back to the original author or some form of credit - that's part of the reason why people write articles in the first place. It will be difficult to rank well in google with a site containing only duplicate articles - if you can present them so that people want to link to your site (rather than the original) that will help, but it's going to be tough going.
Rasputin You see, I understand this. First, this is not a resource I want to make money on. It's just a supplementary resource that might drive some traffic to me (as there will be my ad placed). That's it. I mean, I have no aim to rank well specifically on this blog, the thing I need is additional traffic. The problem with there articles are that some of them contain only author's e-mail, so in this case I think that I should rather put the author's email than where the article was taken from. If I have to put web address where the article comes from, again, there are several websites with the same articles, and now comes the question which website should I show there. So, maybe it will be just better not to put a link at all (except the cases when there is an original author's name, but not the name of the website (or several websites) where this article can be found). The only thing I think (in case i'll present the articles so that people want to visit my site rather then the original - you see, I do not want people to link to this resource, simply to find info (if they find) and to see my advertising placed on this website. That's it.) So, the only thing I think is to optimize these pages for SE. Actually, all those webpages with original articles are no optimized at all, and are found manually by the visitors or by typing something like general keyword for free articles, and are not high in the SE results. So, my problem was with placing links to these websites (Sincerely speaking, I do not want this, as I do not want to place any outgoing linkgs except my own and the only one). Ups. Wrote too much. Now it's your turn
But to get additional traffic from these articles they will need to rank... and to rank, they will need people to link to them In my experience you are expecting too much, to hope for traffic from free articles that aren't linked to from anywhere else. I have a couple of sites with some free articles on and can tell you, you would be much better off writing (or paying someone else to write) a few decent articles for your site - they will rank, people will eventually link to them, and you'll get traffic. Google are very good at ignoring these type of free articles, and the only way round it is with inbound links. There are better ways to get traffic to your site - quality content, blog comments, forum signatures, submitting articles to article sites, social networking sites, advertising etc that will work much better for you than using free articles. But on the other hand it isn't a bad idea to use free articles as an additional resource on your site, for people who have found the site from somewhere else - on re-reading I think maybe that is what you are suggesting? That can work.
It will be detected as a duplicate content and won't be indexed. Exaggerating with duplicate content could even damage your site. Try to rewrite the articles before publishing them.
Rasputin You've got the idea - I expect to use these free articles as as additional resource only. I mean, what I plan to do is to make a collection of .. let me say.. thousand or two thousands of articles on different topics. In fact, I do not plan to promote this website seriously, as this site will be for informational purposes only, no commerce. As you've said, for people who have found the site from somewhere else. I plan to do like this - 1) Website 1 - my commercial website domain.com. I'll promote it, write original articles for it, etc. As a matter of fact, I'm already doing this. 2) Website 2 - website.blogspot.com - information blog with these free articles, with a huge collection of all types of article (related to my commercial activity) found elsewhere. Informational purposes only, no commerce. The only outbound link there will be to my own Website 1. So my question was abt this blog on blogspot.com with free articles. So, as far as I understood, I can publish these free articles with no link to where I've gotten them (if there is an author, I'll publish his name, of course, but no mentioning about the original website). The only changes I make - I'll modify article titles to optimize them for SE. Is it ok? My friends are joking that I become paranoid with this copyright issue
zexy Ok. And if these articles are not on my own commercial domain, but simply on blogname.blogspot.com with the only outbound link to my commercial domain? Btw, what is the percentage for the webpage content for Google to consider it duplicate?
1. So you have a duplicate content on blogname.blogspot.com and link to your site.com? Most probably the blogspot blog won't be indexed and that means no backlink for you. 2. Nobody knows that and I'm sure the algorithm is changing from time to time.
zexy That's right. There is a duplicate content on blogname.blogspot.com and link to my site.com Just now get info that it is better to make ratio 30%/70% (duplicate/original). And another info that seems to be even more interesting - "Syndicate carefully: If you syndicate your content on other sites, make sure they include a link back to the original article on each syndicated article. Even with that, note that we’ll always show the (unblocked) version we think is most appropriate for users in each given search, which may or may not be the version you’d prefer." (plagiarismtoday.com/2006/12/21/google-addresses-duplicate-content/) Hm... now one more question. let's assume I'd insert link to each page from where the original article was taken (at least to one site, if there are few sites with this duplicate article). What will be better? I do not want the visitors to click that link and to go there. If I use nofollow tag, Googlebot will not go to this original site and will consider my content duplicate. Hm... on the other hand, I'd want to invent some strategy that will allow me to obey Google rules and to attract some attention to this free resource. Just another thought I've come across with. There are news websites, where are news published (200-400 words and more) THe same news are often published on different websites and Google does show these results. Does it mean that G allows this? Definitely, I need some solution.
Hm. Just now Check this one with G - "Syndicate carefully: If you syndicate your content on other sites, make sure they include a link back to the original article" and then check this - Syndicate carefully: If you syndicate your content on other sites, make sure they include a link back to the original article THere is also a note - In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 2 already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included. Anyway, it is very interesting. In this case, let's assume I take this article to be published on my website. Which website should I indicate as the one with original article? (totally confused) Just another thought What if I optimize each page per each keyword, but instead of publishing the articles I'll make only a teaser and a mail form, where I'll suggest the visitor to write me and I'll send him the article by e-mail (free, of course).In this case I will solve the problem with dubplicate content and will be able to create a directory on my website.com instead of making the same on blogspot. Will it be better?