How to deal with DMCA takedown notices
-
How do you deal with DMCA takedown notices related to product descriptions? With Google it is simple enough for any person to submit a DMCA takedown notice irrespective if the owner holds right to the content.
One such example is this http://www.chillingeffects.org/notice.cgi?sID=1012391. Although Google dealt in that particular case properly (and did not remove content), we find that nowadays more and more competitors use the DMCA takedowns as an easy way to de-index competitive content.
Since the person registering the DMCA takedown does not require to provide any proof of copyright, de-indexing happens quite quickly.
Try this URL: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/domains/mydomain.com/ (replace your domain) to see if you have been affected.
I would like your opinion if you have been affected by takedowns on product descriptions - in my mind if product descriptions are informative and relate to the characteristics of the product then takedowns should be denied.
-
luckily I have never had that problem, also it seems that you will be alerted in you webmaster account if someone requests a takedown.
Still an interesting "black hat" technique to remove competitors out of the serps that might not have webmaster accounts
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
I'm noticing that URL that were once indexed by Google are suddenly getting dropped without any error messages in Webmasters Tools, has anyone seen issues like this before?
I'm noticing that URLs that were once indexed by Google are suddenly getting dropped without any error messages in Webmasters Tools, has anyone seen issues like this before? Here's an example:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nystromandy
http://www.thefader.com/2017/01/11/the-carter-documentary-lil-wayne-black-lives-matter0 -
How to deal with very similar (thin) content by design?
Hello all, I run a website which lists direct contact details (tel. and email.) of organisations. I have 100s of similar pages which are very thin on content (by design). Each page has a couple of lines of somewhat unique content. People find the site useful since it simply tells them which number to dial in order to speak to a real person at any given organisation. They can't easily find the information elsewhere and I believe it satisfies search intent. Am I at risk for being flagged for duplicate / low quality content? Should I add more text simply to add 'unique' content to each page even though it adds no value to users? That doesn't seem right either! Looking forward to hear where you guys stand on this, Many thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nathandh80 -
Dealing with thin comment
Hi again! I've got a site where around 30% of URLs have less than 250 words of copy. It's big though, so that is roughly 5,000 pages. It's an ecommerce site and not feasible to bulk up each one. I'm wondering if noindexing them is a good idea, and then measuring if this has an effect on organic search?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blink-SEO1 -
What's the deal with significantLinks?
http://schema.org/significantLink Schema.org has a definition for "non-navigation links that are clicked on the most." Presumably this means something like the big green buttons on Moz's homepage. But does anyone know how they affect anything? In http://moz.com/blog/schemaorg-a-new-approach-to-structured-data-for-seo#comment-142936, Jeremy Nelson says " It's quite possible that significant links will pass anchor text as well if a previous link to the page was set in navigation, effictively making obselete the first-link-counts rule, and I am interested in putting that to test." This is a pretty obscure comment but it's one of the only results I could find on the subject. Is this BS? I can't even make out what all of it is saying. So what's the deal with significantLinks and how can we use them to SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NerdsOnCall0 -
Dealing with Penguin: Changing URL instead of removing links
I have some links pointing to categories from article directories, web directories, and a few blogs. We are talking about 20-30 links in total. They are less than 5% of the links to my site (counting unique domains). I either haven't been able to make contact with webmasters, or they are asking money to remove the links. If I simply rename the URL (for example changing mysite.com/t-shirt.html to mysite.com/tshirts.html), will that resolve any penguin issues? The link will forward to the homepage since that page no longer exists. I really want to avoid using the disavow tool if possible. I appreciate the feedback. If you have actually done this, please share your experience.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | inhouseseo0 -
Penguin Update, what I've noticed
Hi Guys, I have spent 2 days looking at our site and competitors after the update, 3 things jump out straight away for us. I am in the travel industry and still on the first page of the major KW's but in the 8 to 10 region, was 2 to 5. 1. The sites that have moved up both have shops selling merchandise which is not the main focus of their site, anyone else spotted sites with a eCommerce section have benefited from latest update? 2. Sites we have links from, although they look like a travel sites, maybe be themed differently by Google. Anybody know a good tool that will help determine what theme a site is? Images, design and content don't always seem to be a good indicator, I think back links to the domain has a big effect on the site you get the link from. Any tool that will help speed up this process would be great. We need more quality links from travel sites (or at least what google thinks is a travel related site). 3. The competitors who have done well seem to have 45% links to home page, we only had 28% so we are focusing now on links to home page. We don't really stand out from the top 10 sites in any other way in terms of other indicators like branded keywords vrs money making kw's. Any thoughts or feedback would be great.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PottyScotty0 -
How to deal with old, indexed hashbang URLs?
I inherited a site that used to be in Flash and used hashbang URLs (i.e. www.example.com/#!page-name-here). We're now off of Flash and have a "normal" URL structure that looks something like this: www.example.com/page-name-here Here's the problem: Google still has thousands of the old hashbang (#!) URLs in its index. These URLs still work because the web server doesn't actually read anything that comes after the hash. So, when the web server sees this URL www.example.com/#!page-name-here, it basically renders this page www.example.com/# while keeping the full URL structure intact (www.example.com/#!page-name-here). Hopefully, that makes sense. So, in Google you'll see this URL indexed (www.example.com/#!page-name-here), but if you click it you essentially are taken to our homepage content (even though the URL isn't exactly the canonical homepage URL...which s/b www.example.com/). My big fear here is a duplicate content penalty for our homepage. Essentially, I'm afraid that Google is seeing thousands of versions of our homepage. Even though the hashbang URLs are different, the content (ie. title, meta descrip, page content) is exactly the same for all of them. Obviously, this is a typical SEO no-no. And, I've recently seen the homepage drop like a rock for a search of our brand name which has ranked #1 for months. Now, admittedly we've made a bunch of changes during this whole site migration, but this #! URL problem just bothers me. I think it could be a major cause of our homepage tanking for brand queries. So, why not just 301 redirect all of the #! URLs? Well, the server won't accept traditional 301s for the #! URLs because the # seems to screw everything up (server doesn't acknowledge what comes after the #). I "think" our only option here is to try and add some 301 redirects via Javascript. Yeah, I know that spiders have a love/hate (well, mostly hate) relationship w/ Javascript, but I think that's our only resort.....unless, someone here has a better way? If you've dealt with hashbang URLs before, I'd LOVE to hear your advice on how to deal w/ this issue. Best, -G
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Celts180 -
Something I noticed in the Google news section, what is it?
I've noticed something like a quote whilst I was doing a search in News section. Does anyone know what is it called? Is it some sort of microdata or something you can manipulate or is it up to Google's algorithm to determine whether or not to display the section and the content of it. The section in question is highlighted in the attached image. Thanks in advance! MqdoW MqdoW.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | robotseo0