Site been plagiarised - duplicate content
-
Hi,
I look after two websites, one sells commercial mortgages the other sells residential mortgages.
We recently redesigned both sites, and one was moved to a new domain name as we rebranded it from being a trading style of the other brand to being a brand in its own right.
I have recently discovered that one of my most important pages on the residential mortgages site is not in Google's index. I did a bit of poking around with Copyscape and found another broker has copied our page almost word-for-word.
I then used copyscape to find all the other instances of plagiarism on the other broker's site and there are a few! It now looks like they have copied pages from our commercial mortgages site as well.
I think the reason our page has been removed from the index is that we relaunced both these sites with new navigation and consequently new urls. Can anyone back me up on this theory?
I am 100% sure that our page is the original version because we write everything in-house and I check it with copyscape before it gets published, Also the fact that this other broker has copied from several different sites corroborates this view.
Our legal team has written two letters (not sent yet) - one to the broker and the other to the broker's web designer. These letters ask the recipient to remove the copied content within 14 days. If they do remove our content from our site, how do I get Google to reindex our pages, given that Google thinks OUR pages are the copied ones and not the other way around? Does anyone have any experience with this? Or, will it just happen automatically? I have no experience of this scenario!
In the past, where I've found duplicate content like this, I've just rewritten the page, and chalked it up to experience but I don't really want to in this case because, frankly, the copy on these pages is really good! And, I don't think it's fair that someone else could potentially be getting customers that were persuaded by OUR copy.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Amelia
-
Hi David,
I hope you had a good weekend?
Thank you for all your help! I reported them to Google using the link you posted and already the other site's URLs that had copied us have been removed and our pages have been put back in the index.
I have to say I am absolutely astounded that Google responded so quickly!
Yes, that is us on Google + and my personal Google + is here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+AmeliaVargo/posts/.
Thank you again for your help thus far, and for your kind offer of more help should we need it!
Have a great day,
Amelia
-
Glad I could help. I really hope you get this all sorted out. Good news is, you found the problem and are working to fix it, which is much better than most people would have been able to do. Have high hopes!
"the two pages they've copied are really important sales pages (remortgage and first time buyer) so for us, it's a massive shame. "
There is still a way to promote those pages, just not using Google organic to do so. Modify some of the content, create a press release, promote that page using social networks, and drive interest to that page and your site the old fashioned way. PPC is always an option as well. Remember, there are many ways to get traffic, don't lose hope or the vision.
On a side note, is this your company?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+TurnkeymortgagesCoUk/postsI can add you to my circles, so if you have any more issues or need additional help just let me know.
-
I just wanted to post up a message to everyone who has helped me with this problem.
First of all, please accept my sincere thanks. I REALLY appreciate everyone's contribution.
Now, I just wanted to tell you all what, as a company, we've decided to do.
- We've written letters to: The company that copied us, their web designer and their host, asking them to remove the copied content within 14 days of the letters.
- We've 'reported' them to Google, via one of the links that David posted (https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=en)
- We've reported them for scraping, using the link that Paddy posted
Hopefully, this problem will go away, but I hate to think how much business we may have lost as a result - the two pages they've copied are really important sales pages (remortgage and first time buyer) so for us, it's a massive shame.
Best wishes, and I hope you all have a great weekend!
Amelia
-
Thank you David.
-
Once their version is removed/rewritten, resubmit your site to Google in every way that you can.
1. Fetch as Google
2. Change sitemap created dates to current day
3. Change crawl frequency in sitemap to daily
4. Check for proper 301 redirects from old pages, when you moved/modified the site to separate branding.
5. Submit the URL in question to Google, and letting them know that someone has copied your site's content. They should be able to see that your was created first.Here are a few links to help:
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/dmca-notice <<< start there
https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=en
http://blog.kissmetrics.com/find-remove-stolen-content/
http://www.orclage.com/report-remove-stolen-duplicate-content-google/
-
Thank you Paddy! Much appreciated, and thank you for helping me again!
-
Ahh, good one.
-
Don't forget about this:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Pw1KVOVRyr4a7ezj_6SHghnX1Y6bp1SOVmy60QjkF0Y/viewform
-
Thank you, you've helped me no end.
Have a great weekend
-
It really depends on the web host whether they will follow it or not. Some that are soley based in the UK might not. If they have US based servers or the site is hosted in the US more than likely they will. It is worth a shot though, I try to rattle as many cages as possible. Here is a little info on filing them in the UK https://www.teneric.co.uk/marketing/copyright-infringement.html
-
Hi Lesley,
Yes, I redirected everything using 301 redirects - page to page. I also used the change of address tool in webmaster tools for the site that changed domains.
I don't know if using DMCA will be appropriate - isn't that a US-only thing or can site owners in the UK use it too? If I can, I will use it.
Thank you for responding - I really do appreciate your help.
Best wishes,
Amelia
-
After they drop out of the searches google will index your site as a the canonical site with that content on it. So that part happens manually. Also, when you relaunched, did you redirect everything from the old site? That helps preserve link juice and at the same time gives search engines a pointer that the address of a page has changed to this new address.
One thing I would suggest is having a DMCA take down notice draft and sent to the host as well. If the other people you send letters to tell you to go pound sand, normally the host does not.
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
-
Shall we add engaging and useful FAQ content in all our pages or rather not because of duplication and reduction of unique content?
We are considering to add at the end of alll our 1500 product pages answers to the 9 most frequently asked questions. These questions and answers will be 90% identical for all our products and personalizing them more is not an option and not so necessary since most questions are related to the process of reserving the product. We are convinced this will increase engagement of users with the page, time on page and it will be genuinely useful for the visitor as most visitors will not visit the seperate FAQ page. Also it will add more related keywords/topics to the page.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
On the downside it will reduce the percentage of unique content per page and adds duplication. Any thoughts about wether in terms of google rankings we should go ahead and benefits in form of engagement may outweight downside of duplication of content?0 -
Duplicate content across domains?
Does anyone have suggestions for managing duplicate product/solution website content across domains? (specifically parent/child company domains) Is it advisable to do this? Will it hurt either domain? Any best practices when going down this path?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pilgrimquality0 -
Duplicate Content with URL Parameters
Moz is picking up a large quantity of duplicate content, consists mainly of URL parameters like ,pricehigh & ,pricelow etc (for page sorting). Google has indexed a large number of the pages (not sure how many), not sure how many of them are ranking for search terms we need. I have added the parameters into Google Webmaster tools And set to 'let google decide', However Google still sees it as duplicate content. Is it a problem that we need to address? Or could it do more harm than good in trying to fix it? Has anyone had any experience? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
Galleries and duplicate content
Hi! I am now studing a website, and I have detected that they are maybe generating duplicate content because of image galleries. When they want to show details of some of their products, they link to a gallery url
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | teconsite
something like this www.domain.com/en/gallery/slide/101 where you can find the logotype, a full image and a small description. There is a next and a prev button over the slider. The next goes to the next picture www.domain.com/en/gallery/slide/102 and so on. But the next picture is in a different URL!!!! The problem is that they are generating lots of urls with very thin content inside.
The pictures have very good resolution, and they are perfect for google images searchers, so we don't want to use the noindex tag. I thought that maybe it would be best to work with a single url with the whole gallery inside it (for example, the 6 pictures working with a slideshow in the same url ), but as the pictures are very big, the page weight would be greater than 7 Mb. If we keep the pictures working that way (different urls per picture), we will be generating duplicate content each time they want to create a gallery. What is your recommendation? Thank you!0 -
Hreflang tag could solve any duplicate content problems on the different versions??
I have run across a couple of articles recently suggesting that using the hreflang tag could solve any SEO problems associated with having duplicate content on the different versions (.co.uk, .com, .ca, etc). here is an example here: http://www.emarketeers.com/e-insight/how-to-use-hreflang-for-international-seo/ Over to you and your technical colleagues, I think ….
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JordanBrown0 -
Help with Best Content Posting Approach - WordPress site
I have a word document that i would like to add to my wordpress site as a page. The document has a large detailed flow chart of a complex legal process. (about 20+ boxes in the flow chart). I do not want to add it as an image because i want search engines to read/index the information in the flow chart. any suggestions to post this detailed flow chart on a WP page in the best SEO manner? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CamiloSC0 -
Two Brands One Site (Duplicate Content Issues)
Say your client has a national product, that's known by different brand names in different parts of the country. Unilever owns a mayonnaise sold East of the Rockies as "Hellmanns" and West of the Rockies as "Best Foods". It's marketed the same way, same slogan, graphics, etc... only the logo/brand is different. The websites are near identical with different logos, especially the interior pages. The Hellmanns version of the site has earned slightly more domain authority. Here is an example recipe page for some "WALDORF SALAD WRAPS by Bobby Flay Recipe" http://www.bestfoods.com/recipe_detail.aspx?RecipeID=12497&version=1 http://www.hellmanns.us/recipe_detail.aspx?RecipeID=12497&version=1 Both recipie pages are identical except for one logo. Neither pages ranks very well, neither has earned any backlinks, etc... Oddly the bestfood version does rank better (even though everything is the same, same backlinks, and hellmanns.us having more authority). If you were advising the client, what would you do. You would ideally like the Hellmann version to rank well for East Coast searches, and the Best Foods version for West Coast searches. So do you: Keep both versions with duplicate content, and focus on earning location relevant links. I.E. Earn Yelp reviews from east coast users for Hellmanns and West Coast users for Best foods? Cross Domain Canonical to give more of the link juice to only one brand so that only one of the pages ranks well for non-branded keywords? (but both sites would still rank for their branded keyworkds). No Index one of the brands so that only one version gets in the index and ranks at all. The other brand wouldn't even rank for it's branded keywords. Assume it's not practical to create unique content for each brand (the obvious answer). Note: I don't work for Unilver, but I have a client in a similar position. I lean towards #2, but the social media firm on the account wants to do #1. (obviously some functionally based bias in both our opinions, but we both just want to do what will work best for client). Any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | crvw0 -
Duplicate Content, Campaign Explorer & Rel Canonical
Google Advises to use Rel Canonical URL's to advise them which page with similiar information is more relevant. You are supposed to put a rel canonical on the non-preferred pages to point back to the desired page. How do you handle this with a product catalog using ajax, where the additional pages do not exist? An example would be: <colgroup><col width="470"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eric_since1910.com
| .com/productcategory.aspx?page=1 /productcategory.aspx?page=2 /productcategory.aspx?page=3 /productcategory.aspx?page=4 The page=1,2,3 and 4 do not physically exist, they are simply referencing additional products I have rel canonical urls' on the main page www.examplesite.com/productcategory.aspx, but I am not 100% sure this is correct or how else it could be handled. Any Ideas Pro mozzers? |0