Duplicated privacy policy pages
-
I work for a small web agency and I noticed that many of the sites that we build have been using the same privacy policy. Obviously it can be a bit of a nightmare to write a unique privacy policy for each client so is Google likely to class this as duplicate content and result in a penalty? They must realise that privacy policies are likely to be the same or very similar as most legal writing tends to be!
I can block the content in robots.txt or meta no-index it if necesarry but I just wanted to get some feedback to see if this is necessary!
-
Agreed. This won't result in a penalty.
To add; as most privacy policies are linked from the footer, so you might want to add a rel="nofollow" to the link.
-
In our Agency we have thousands of clients with the same privacy policy (in german we have to have two of them called: impressum & datenschutz) - mosty the same content no penalty.
You can noindex it (some people do that) you can do nothing - there wont be a penalty for that. And privacy polciy sites are not the pages you focus to rank with in a tuff keyword area
Think thats nearby what pixel by pixel said. But I would say - no penalty for your domain for sure. -
Google has mentioned boiler plate duplicate content isn't the worse and is generally just ignored by Google but if you did want to be safe you can do as you suggested
Blocking robots / no index (same result)
rel=canonical tag to one main site with your policy this way you still get some form of link juice.
Do nothing- It's very rare if Google would give you a penalty for just having duplicated privacy policy not to mention I assume you would be tweaking it with the name of the site etc. any way.
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
-
Google webcache of product page redirects back to product page
Hi all– I've legitimately never seen this before, in any circumstance. I just went to check the google webcache of a product page on our site (was just grabbing the last indexation date) and was immediately redirected away from google's cached version BACK to the site's standard product page. I ran a status check on the product page itself and it was 200, then ran a status check on the webcache version and sure enough, it registered as redirected. It looks like this is happening for ALL indexed product pages across the site (several thousand), and though organic traffic has not been affected it is starting to worry me a little bit. Has anyone ever encountered this situation before? Why would a google webcache possibly have any reason to redirect? Is there anything to be done on our side? Thanks as always for the help and opinions, y'all!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TukTown1 -
Crawling/indexing of near duplicate product pages
Hi, Hope someone can help me out here. This is the current situation: We sell stones/gravel/sand/pebbles etc. for gardens. I will take a type of pebbles and the corresponding pages/URL's to illustrate my question --> black beach pebbles. We have a 'top' product page for black beach pebbles on which you can find different types of quantities (differing from 20kg untill 1600 kg). There is not any search volume related to the different quantities The 'top' page does not link to the pages for the different quantities The content on the pages for the different quantities is not exactly the same (different price + slightly different content). But a lot of the content is the same. Current situation:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMAGARD
- Most pages for the different quantities do not have internal links (about 95%) But the sitemap does contain all of these pages. Because the sitemap contains all these URL's, google frequently crawls them (I checked the logfiles) and has indexed them. Problems: Google spends its time crawling irrelevant pages --> our entire website is not that big, so these quantity URL's kind of double the total number of URL's. Having url's in the sitemap that do not have an internal link is a problem on its own All these pages are indexed so all sorts of gravel/pebbles have near duplicates. My solution: remove these URL's from the sitemap --> that will probably stop Google from regularly crawling these pages Putting a canonical on the quantity pages pointing to the top-product page. --> that will hopefully remove the irrelevant (no search volume) near duplicates from the index My questions: To be able to see the canonical, google will need to crawl these pages. Will google still do that after removing them from the sitemap? Do you agree that these pages are near duplicates and that it is best to remove them from the index? A few of these quantity pages do have intenral links (a few procent of them) because of a sale campaign. So there will be some (not much) internal links pointing to non-canonical pages. Would that be a problem? Thanks a lot in advance for your help! Best!1 -
Competing with doorway pages
Hi all, it's my understanding that 'doorway pages' are bad practice. However, when googling for the services that our company offers, along the lines of '[service] [location]', businesses turn up in Google SERPs that outrank us purely with doorway pages. Take this as an example: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=seo+dorking One of the results is this company who seem to rank for pretty much every town modifier: https://prioritypixels.co.uk/seo-agency-dorking/ If you look at their sitemaps you'll see thousands of these pages: https://prioritypixels.co.uk/page-sitemap16.xml All the content is slightly different but broadly speaking it is very similar. It seems that, in the short term, we can't compete with this company but we could if we employed the same tactics. So my question is: is what they are doing really risking a penalty? b1Lpp5
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bee1590 -
Manage category pages and duplicate content issues
Hi everybody, I am now auditing this website www.disfracessimon.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | teconsite
this website has some issues with canonicals and other things. But right now I have found something that I would like to know your opinion. When I was checking parts of the content in google to find duplicate content issues I found this: I google I searched: "Chaleco de streck decorado con botones" and found First result: "Hombre trovador" is the one I was checking -> Correct
The following results are category pages where the product is listed in. I was wondering if this could cause any problem related with duplicated content. Should I no index category pages or should I keep it?
The first result in google was the product page. And category pages I think are good for link juice transfer and to capture some searchs from Google. Any advice? Thank you0 -
Does duplicate content penalize the whole site or just the pages affected?
I am trying to assess the impact of duplicate content on our e-commerce site and I need to know if the duplicate content is affecting only the pages that contain the dupe content or does it affect the whole site? In Google that is. But of course. Lol
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjs20100 -
SEOMOZ duplicate page result: True or false?
SEOMOZ say's: I have six (6) duplicate pages. Duplicate content tool checker say's (0) On the physical computer that hosts the website the page exists as one file. The casing of the file is irrelevant to the host machine, it wouldn't allow 2 files of the same name in the same directory. To reenforce this point, you can access said file by camel-casing the URI in any fashion (eg; http://www.agi-automation.com/Pneumatic-grippers.htm). This does not bring up a different file each time, the server merely processes the URI as case-less and pulls the file by it's name. What is happening in the example given is that some sort of indexer is being used to create a "dummy" reference of all the site files. Since the indexer doesn't have file access to the server, it does this by link crawling instead of reading files. It is the crawler that is making an assumption that the different casings of the pages are in fact different files. Perhaps there is a setting in the indexer to ignore casing. So the indexer is thinking that these are 2 different pages when they really aren't. This makes all of the other points moot, though they would certainly be relevant in the case of an actual duplicated page." ****Page Authority Linking Root Domains http://www.agi-automation.com/ 43 82 http://www.agi-automation.com/index.html 25 2 http://www.agi-automation.com/Linear-escapements.htm 21 1 www.agi-automation.com/linear-escapements.htm 16 1 http://www.agi-automation.com/Pneumatic-grippers.htm 30 3 http://www.agi-automation.com/pneumatic-grippers.htm 16 1**** Duplicate content tool estimates the following: www and non-www header response; Google cache check; Similarity check; Default page check; 404 header response; PageRank dispersion check (i.e. if www and non-www versions have different PR).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AGIAutomation0 -
Duplicate Content | eBay
My client is generating templates for his eBay template based on content he has on his eCommerce platform. I'm 100% sure this will cause duplicate content issues. My question is this.. and I'm not sure where eBay policy stands with this but adding the canonical tag to the template.. will this work if it's coming from a different page i.e. eBay? Update: I'm not finding any information regarding this on the eBay policy's: http://ocs.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?CustomerSupport&action=0&searchstring=canonical So it does look like I can have rel="canonical" tag in custom eBay templates but I'm concern this can be considered: "cheating" since rel="canonical is actually a 301 but as this says: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/12/handling-legitimate-cross-domain.html it's legitimately duplicate content. The question is now: should I add it or not? UPDATE seems eBay templates are embedded in a iframe but the snap shot on google actually shows the template. This makes me wonder how they are handling iframes now. looking at http://www.webmaster-toolkit.com/search-engine-simulator.shtml does shows the content inside the iframe. Interesting. Anyone else have feedback?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | joseph.chambers1 -
On Page question
HI folks, I have a warning that I have missing meta tag descriptions on two pages. 1) http://bluetea.com.au/wp-login.php 2) http://bluetea.com.au/wp-login.php?action=lostpassword Is this something I should just ignore? Or is there a best practice I should be implementing? Thank you for your time
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PHDAustralia680