Iran across this quote on another board... I don't understand this way of thinking. If you offer an RSS feed on your site, then you are asking people to republish the content already. RSS stands for "really simple syndication". If you don't want people to syndicate your content, then do not offer a way for them to do it! I've heard arguments that these RSS feeds are for personal use only and nobody should profit from the content except the writer. Well, let's explore that thought. What about all those "subscribe to my feed" buttons on your site? You most likely have one for Yahoo, Feedburner, and others. Don't think for a second that when indiduals subscribe to your content through these services that the service itself isn't profiting - and they are certainly profiting from your content. Why is it ok for you to allow Yahoo and Google to profit, but not a fellow blogger? There are many benefits from your posts being picked up by another blog too. In most cases your content is posted as is, meaning that all links that you include in your post remain when it is picked up by other blogs. Think of the incredible marketing power that gives you! You could end each post with a tagline ad for your products or even an affiliate link to someone elses products. Now that tagline is being published on hundreds of other sites. Backlinks, affiliate links, whatever you want to send out there. The thing that gets me the most about people that get upset when their feeds are used is that they can stop it themselves, rather than doing what they can to harm the person using the feed. Whenever you publish an RSS feed, you have the option to allow your entire post to be fed or just title and summary. The bottom line is that "splogs" can be a win-win for you and the splogger. If you still disagree, then stop publishing RSS feeds, or at least publish only summaries. What say you?