Copying my content
-
Hi there,
I run a successful e-commerce website, which the product pages are rich with content linking to other products etc, one of our retailers who sell our products I just noticed copied and pasted the content I have written for these product pages leaving in all the links, which it turn are linking back to my product pages, is this a good thing? or should I make that retailer put in canonical tags?
Thanks for any help
-
Regarding your last point I am sure I recently watched a WBF were Rand had mentioned this was a good way of getting backlinks, I did question this myself when I heard this.
-
Hi Alan,
Thanks for your feedback.
This is becoming more of an issue for me, as we have literraly hundreds of online retailers selling our products, however they do not have the resource in creating new content for these product pages and I certainly don't for hundreds of different websites.
If I could persuade these retailers to put canonical and point it to my product pages would this benefit my SERPs?
-
Going to have to agree with Alan here. I've worked on a lot of ecommerce sites and as the categories fill up with competitors all using the same text it quickly becomes an issue of duplicate content and authorial ownership. What I've seen in the past is cost-sharing, where the manufacturer and the retailer will combine monies to hire authors to make retailer-specific content for those products. In part it depends on the category as well; something like clothing can have just about any old description, but something like a calculator is pretty hard to make sexy.
The links are another question entirely; in a way I don't see how they can do anything but be neutral, or helpful to you right now. It certainly establishes you as the originator of the content too.
-
You're facing one of the most challenging issues e-commerce sites face - and here's what I recommend to manufacturers -
Using canonical references might be beneficial to your site, however it leaves retailers unable to rank for those products. So every retail site that carries your products should have their own unique version of content - completely unique descriptions. This can be a challenge when there are a lot of products in the database, and of course would not apply to technical specifications within product detail pages, however it's vital for everyone's long term success to get the descriptive text to be truly unique. To the point where the majority of content on each product detail page that is unique outweighs the portion copied (product name, technical specifications, category assigned, etc.).
Whether YOU provide that unique content (and thus control the message), or require that your retailers do the heavy lifting is up to you to decide.
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
-
Devaluing certain content to push better content forward
Hi all, I'm new to Moz, but hoping to learn a lot from it in hopes of growing my business. I have a pretty specific question and hope to get some feedback on how to proceed with some changes to my website. First off, I'm a landscape and travel photographer. My website is at http://www.mickeyshannon.com - you can see that the navigation quickly spreads out to different photo galleries based on location. So if a user was looking for photos from California, they would find galleries for Lake Tahoe, Big Sur, the Redwoods and San Francisco. At this point, there are probably 600-800 photos on my website. At last half of these are either older or just not quite up to par with the quality I'm starting to feel like I should produce. I've been contemplating dumbing down the galleries, and not having it break down so far. So instead of four sub-galleries of California, there would just be one California gallery. In some cases, where there are lots of good images in a location, I would probably keep the sub-galleries, but only if there were dozens of images to work with. In the description of each photo, the exact location is already mentioned, so I'm not sure there's a huge need for these sub-galleries except where there's still tons of good photos to work with. I've been contemplating building a sort of search archive. Where the best of my photos would live in the main galleries, and if a user didn't find what they were looking for, they could go and search the archives for older photos. That way they're still around for licensing purposes, etc. while the best of the best are pushed to the front for those buying fine art prints, etc. These pages for these search archives would probably need to be de-valued somehow, so that the main galleries would be more important SEO-wise. So for the California galleries, four sub-galleries of perhaps 10 images each would become one main California gallery with perhaps 15 images. The other 25 images would be thrown in the search archive and could be searched by keyword. The question I have - does this sound like a good plan, or will I really be killing my site when it comes to SEO by making such a large change? My end goal would be to push my better content to the front, while scaling back a lot of the excess. Hopefully I explained this question well. If not, I can try to elaborate further! Thanks, Mickey
Technical SEO | | msphotography0 -
Duplicate Content Question
I have a client that operates a local service-based business. They are thinking of expanding that business to another geographic area (a drive several hours away in an affluent summer vacation area). The name of the existing business contains the name of the city, so it would not be well-suited to market 'City X' business in 'City Y'. My initial thought was to (for the most part) 'duplicate' the existing site onto a new site (brand new root domain). Much of the content would be the exact same. We could re-word some things so there aren't entire lengthy paragraphs of identical info, but it seems pointless to completely reinvent the wheel. We'll get as creative as possible, but certain things just wouldn't change. This seems like the most pragmatic thing to do given their goals, but I'm worried about duplicate content. It doesn't feel as though this is spammy though, so I'm not sure if there's cause for concern.
Technical SEO | | stevefidelity0 -
Press Releases & Duplicate Content
How do you do press releases without duplicating the content? I need to post it on my website along with having it on PR websites. But isn't that considered bad for SEO since it's duplicate content?
Technical SEO | | MercyCollege0 -
Best place for new relevant content ?
Hi everyone, The background to my question is that one of the companies I work for has just produced a load of videos answering many of the common questions about their products, for the ecommerce part of their site. I've got these videos transcribed which I want to use as the backbone to some of the main pages on the site (some of which are already ranking reasonably well). I was thinking of putting this content on their department page (so for example their departments would be kitesurfing, land kites, toy kites etc.) above links to their sections (e.g. kite surf kites, kite surf boards etc.). Do you think this would be a good place to put a large amount of text ? (the text will be in a scrollable div) - i.e. could it get in the way of the links which are currently passing juice deeper in to the site ? Alternatives are to put the videos under the links to the sections (which would place them below the fold), or to place each video on its own page and simply link to these pages from the departments page (although it is the department page we wish to rank). Another alternative is to put links to the sections both before and after the new content. Hope that all makes sense! Thanks in advance
Technical SEO | | stukerr0 -
Duplicate Page Content
Hi within my campaigns i get an error "crawl errors found" that says duplicate page content found, it finds the same content on the home pages below. Are these seen as two different pages? And how can i correct these errors as they are just one page? http://poolstar.net/ http://poolstar.net/Home_Page.php
Technical SEO | | RouteAccounts0 -
How do I combat content theft?
A new site popped up that has completely replicated a site own by my client. This site is literally a copycat, scraped all the content, and copied the design down to the colors. I've already reported the site to the hosting provider and filled a spam report on Google. I noticed that the author changed some of the text, and internal links so that they don't link to our site anymore. Some of these were missed. I'm also going to take a couple preventative actions like change stuff in .htaccess, but that doesn't help me now, just in case it happens again in the future. I'm wondering what else i can or should be doing?
Technical SEO | | flowsimple0 -
Duplicate content?
I have a question regarding a warning that I got on one of my websites, it says Duplicate content. I'm canonical url:s and is also using blocking Google out from pages that you are warning me about. The pages are not indexed by Google, why do I get the warnings? Thanks for great seotools! 3M5AY.png
Technical SEO | | bnbjbbkb0 -
Multiple domain names with similar content
Hi, we've got multiple domains that point to the same website and same content. The only difference is the currency and some text, you could say only about 5% difference in each domain's content: http://www.redwrappings.com.au/
Technical SEO | | Essentia
http://www.redwrappings.com/ Will Google penalise us for having 95% similar content for each domain (they sell the same products but in different currencies)? We shoudn't really put canonical link, should we? Because 5% of the content is different, which means they are not identical. What would be the best solution if this is a problem? Thanks0