And a win/win situation would be if you wrote a fresh original summary about your hub and send it to them to replace the text they've lifted. That way they won't have to go to much effort, and you'll have a quality backlink.
The best option might be to get the person who has copied your hub to add a canonical tag to the copied version that points to your hub as the canonical page. This way both copies can be online but your hub will recieve any benefit from the links that point to the copied version. This would also negate any problems with duplicate content.
Unfortunately, I'm the stereotypical boozing writer more than the stereotypical disciplined Renaissance man writer that would know what kind of a tag that is (having heard of it, which I have not) or how to suggest it, so, alas, I did not do it.
I will chalk that up there with Dark's excellent idea as one that I missed the opportunity for.
Mayhaps if she argues with me, I will suggest it in round two of our discourse, prior to ratting her out to the website powers-that-be.
We've heard several concerns about Hubs getting copied and losing traffic and we know how frustrating this is for the author. Google tries to identify the original content creator and show that in the search...
Is there anyway that a feature can be added to Hubpages that identifies where in a hub it thinks there is an instance of duplication.I recently published a hub which was identified as duplicate, I spent hours...