Marking our content as original, where the rel=author tag might not be applied
-
Hello,
Can anyone tell, if it is possible to protect text –type content without the rel=author tag?
We host a business listing site, where, apart from the general contact information, we have also started to write original 800+ character-long unique and original contents for the suppliers, where we expect visits, so rankings should be increased.
My issue is that this is a very competitive business, and content crawling is really an everyday practice. Of course, I would like to keep my original content or at least mark it as mine for Google.
The easiest way would be the author tag, but the problem is, that I do not want our names and our photos to be assigned to these contents, because from one hand, we are not acknowledged content providers on our own (no bio and whatsoever), and on the other hand, we provide contents for every sort of businesses, so just having additional links to our other contents, might not help readers to get what they want. I also really do not think that a photo of me could help increase the CTR from the SERP:)
What we currently do, is that we submit every major fresh content through url submission in WMT, hoping that first indexing might help. We have only a handful of them within a day, so not more than 10.
Yes, I could perhaps use absolute links, but this one is not a feasible scenario in all cases, and about DMCA, as our programmer says, what you can see on the internet, that you can basically own.
So finally, I do not mind our contents being stolen, as I can’t possibly prevent this. I want however our original content to be recognized as ours by Google, even after the stealing is done.
(Best would be an ’author tag for business’, so connected to our business Google+ page, but I am not aware, this function can be used this way.)
Thank you in advance for all of you, sharing your thoughts with me on the topic.
-
Hi Mat,
You have provided some great clarification, thank you.
Now, I only have one thing to be sorted out:
Should I add the DMCA protection badges to all pages with unique content, as soon as they are created?
My dilemma is, that let's say I find my content somewhere else. I will submit a take down request through DMCA. How it is going to be proven, whose site owns the original content?
I am definetely not an expert in this, but it can easily happen, that my page is not the older one, and the page where my content is placed to, simply just changed its previous content, but the page itself is older than my relevant page.
Thank you
-
Hi András ,
I think that you are getting confused to what rel=author actually does. It can help as part of the picture that shows google who the originator of content is, but it doesn't assert it in the way you seem to be suggesting. I'll come back to that, but let me address another point first:
as our programmer says, what you can see on the internet, that you can basically own.
This is plainly wrong. I would agree that whatever you see on the internet can just be stolen. However that is not the same as owning it, something that international law backs up.
If you have valuable content that is likely to get stolen then you need to do 2 things:
1. Ensure that search engines find your copy first and see you as the originator
2. Police it
#1 You seem to be doing. Manual submission via webmaster tools sounds painful to me, but will do that. Tweet it, link it, ping it etc. Do what you can to establish "this was here" early and to get Google to index it.
Part of that same picture is to be seen as trustworthy. Get those high authority citations, ensure you content is always unique etc.
However, #2 is about you taking responsibility for your content. It's yours, you own it, there are no internet police so it is up to you. Try a service like copyscape, or just use google alerts to let you know when people steal stuff. When they do hit them with a take down notice, send the same to their hosts, domain registrar etc - then follow it up with a DMCA request.
This will stop a lot of it. It will also make it a pain in the bum for some of the others (if it is more hassle to steal from you than someone else then they will steal from someone else!). It also starts undermining the trust in their sites. If google have frequent DMCA requests about particular domains it helps build that picture. If you see them stealing other people content let the other victims know as well and encourage them to do the same.
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
-
Does google penalize you if you post content in french and english on a website
I'm trying to encourage content editors to only post content in either English or French. For example we have a French press release but the team are wanting it on our site in French and English. I thought this would fall under duplicate content rules. Does google penalize you if you post content in French and English on a website?
Content Development | | EstherBrice0 -
Is there a good tool for finding Duplicate Content?
Hi! Are there any recommendation voor Duplicate Content finder tools? Is it offered on MOZ (not the one that belongs to 'seo issues') or a different site?
Content Development | | Marketing-SurpriseFactory1 -
How to optimize content pages with ecommerce?
Some content pages act as buyers guides for certain products for example Used Paddle Boards for Sale - http://www.islesurfboards.com/used-paddle-boards-for-sale.aspx this is a content page that gets huge amount of traffic and is pure content with no products on the page, but we also have a ecommerce section of the site that is Used Paddle Boards for Sale -http://www.islesurfboards.com/buy-used-paddle-boards-for-sale.aspx however this page just has a small paragraph and all the ecommerce product related to this section on the page. The content only page above gets all the traffic and rank and then they click over to the actual ecomm section wiht the products from a link on that page. Should i merge these two together so its just one page and put the content on the ecom page? If i do all the content with push the ecommerce products down which is not good so what does anyone recommend as a best practice? Also will this mess up the content pages rank is i merge them assuming i redirect? or Keep them seperate like i have with a content page regarding "used paddle boards for sale" and an ecommerce page that sells acutal "used paddle boards for sale"
Content Development | | isle_surf0 -
How to produced amazing contents
How to get started and produce some really fantastic contents on regular basis? I am into weight lose niche and don't want to produce garbage. where to start and get going?
Content Development | | Sajiali0 -
Evergreen content: Dedicated section or blog posts?
As part of our content strategy we are creating an ongoing series of articles to help both our potential buyers and our users learn about our product and improve their knowledge of industry best practices in general. Internally, we've had some debate as to where we should host this content within our site. We've identified two approaches: Series of blog posts Dedicated knowledge section of the website If we go with the first approach, we would created a dedicated section that indexed all the blog posts. If we went with the second, we'd create blog posts for each of the articles announcing their addition. Is there any difference, SEO wise with the two approaches? What would you recommend? Thanks, Darren.
Content Development | | dgibbons0 -
Should we syndicate content?
Hello Mozzers! Our company (FindMyAccident) is an accident news site. The goal is to roll our reporting out to all 50 states; currently, we operate full-time in 7 states. To date, the largest expenditure is our writing staff. We hire professional
Content Development | | Wayne76
journalists who work with police departments and other sources to develop written
content and video for our site. Our visitors also contribute stories and/or
tips that add to the content on our domain. In short, our content is original. A site that often appears alongside us in the SERPs in the markets where we work full-time is accidentin.com. They are a site that only syndicates accident news and offers little original content. (They also allow users to submit their own accident stories, and the entries index quickly and are sometimes viewed by hundreds of people in the same day. What's perplexing is that these entires are isolated incidents that have little to no media value, yet they do extremely well.) The link profile is virtually non-existent. There are approximately 6 linking domains. I don't rest my bets with Quantcast figures, but accidentin does use their pixel sourcing and the figures indicate that they are receiving up to 80k visitors a day in some instances. Not too shabby for the Flying Dutchman of accident news sites. 🙂 I understand that it's common to see news sites syndicate from the AP, etc., and traffic accident news is not going to have a lot of competition (in most instances), but the real shocker is that accidentin will sometimes appear as the first or second result above the original sources. What the...!? The question: does anyone have a guess as to what is making it perform so well? While looking at their model, I'm wondering if we're not silly to syndicate news in the states where we don't have actual staff? It would seem we could attract more traffic by setting up syndication in our vacant states. Should the Panda updates have any effect on their site? Thanks, gang.... Wayne0 -
Reusing Older content urls
Hi I have Windows Phone Games related site , we often post press release for various games as soon as they get released and later in a week or 2 we review some of these games . My question is , would it be better if I use use the old post and just delete the press release and post the review in that space . I will use an example to explain the situation Today I will do a press release : http://www.bestwp7games.com/infinite-flight-flight-simulator-for-windows-phone-7.html then say after a week I publish a review : http://www.bestwp7games.com/infinite-flight-windows-phone-flight-simulator-review.html My question is would it be better ( from an SEO point of view ) if I just delete the content from http://www.bestwp7games.com/infinite-flight-flight-simulator-for-windows-phone-7.html and add the review content in to that post ? PS : I am not a SEO guy so this might be a stupid question , if it is just go easy on me 🙂
Content Development | | Saijo_George0 -
Duplicate content via syndication?
I have a full text RSS feed of my blog available for users with RSS readers. A few sites have said they would like to republish the unedited feed on their site (so my blog postings show up on their sites with links back to my site embedded). I'm wondering if this is a good/bad idea (to let them republish my postings) and/or if I should do anything in the feed to protect myself from an SEO point of view? Am I at risk of some kind of duplicate content penalty from Google, or will Google figure out that I'm the original source (which would be good) since the blog postings have links back to my site? Thanks!
Content Development | | scanlin0