Am I wrong about this? I just assumed it was a big no-no to post content that someone else created, and that we found posted somewhere else on the internet or published elsewhere - including recipes that aren't ours or someone else's how-to-make instructions - regardless of how much other content (descriptions, stories, etc.) we add for filler.
Or are we allowed to post this content as long as we attribute the content and cite its source properly? If yes, shouldn't we have permission from the original author to re-post?
Posting work that was not created by you( isn't yours) is not allowed, can get you in trouble with the original owner, plus HP could possibly ban you. You may use quotes with the proper credit and some images with the same caveat.
Keep in mind that using large chunks as quotations can also brand your hub as duplicate. Even if the original author grants you permission to use large portions of their article, because the work has been previously published your hub will more than likely be branded as duplicate....
You can post links to other works - for example you could add the tittle and include a link. You can even write your own summary for that link (not copy theirs)
You CANNOT copy any of their text (just the title) - this includes recipes. The thing with recipes is that many of the standard recipes are extremely similar.
However, you can appropriately QUOTE a portion from someone, but you must keep it very brief and it must include credit and a link.
I hope this helps
Thank you both. That's what I thought. My feeling then, now that I've seen so much of this sort of thing going on on Hubpages, is that the offenders don't realize they're violating a rule, or that the policy is not well enforced or monitored!
People like you and me need to report it. I've reported lots and within 24 hours Ive seen the hubs taken down and at times the hubber has been banned
your seeing copies of other hubs on hubs? The full text? Most of it?
I'm with lobo - you can flag it and include a link to the original hub. You can also inform the original owner. I recently came across a blogger that had completely cut and paste hubs to her blog. I found over 25 hubs. I filed with the DMAC or is it DMCA?? I also sent messages to the hubbers of the origianl text. Anyway, the blog posts were quickly removed and the blogger learned her lesson.
Again, we can feature other hubbers and write summaries or reviews, but we CANNOT copy their hub text.
Technically, you can copy an article from the internet and use it, but you are required to give credit to the real author. Some works are truly copyrighted, which is not an easy process. Some of the article submission sites have policies. Some require that you contact the author directly for permission. I have never had a problem as long as I gave credit to author. In fact I even post the source of article, as well as the link to the article itself. Or, I write a snippet and then add link to full article in text.
Wrong, wrong. WRONG,
You are 100% wrong.
I wish your post could be deleted so some person doesn't read it and believe it.
Thanks, Pcunix! On the simplest level, that is not the original content that we promise to write here. On a more complicated level, that is not the original content that we promise to write here.
Are you saying LindaSmith1 is wrong?
I didn't want to actually SAY it, so I hinted around the issue :-)
I've heard this from people who stole my content. "You put it on the Internet, so it is fair game!' and other dumb excuses, they get that from reading foolish things other people post.
It is amazing how stupendously bad the advice people give on the Internet can be sometimes, isn't it.
Another type of article to stay away from is those Free or purchase PLR articles. Other people are using the same articles as well. These are nice for ideas or information and that is about it. I have used a few, but then again, I posted the source rather than claiming it as my own to be on the safe side.
Missolive: A professional SEO, as well as other sources is that unless something is legally Copyrighted it is open game. But, there are those outside of hub pages that do copy articles and claim them as their own. Technically, if you do that, you are to give full credit to the author. But then again, those outside of hub pages may do all the right things, provide link to author and post authors name, without realizing that when they do this it may go back to HP as duplicate content, against the original author.
It really pays to read the TOS of these article sites, etc before you do anything, or just write a snippet and add link to the original article itself.
Since 1989, when any work is originally produced, it is copyrighted at the moment of creation. Nothing is "open game" unless explicitly expressed by the author of the creation. Here is a site that goes over copyright laws. http://mason.gmu.edu/~montecin/copyright-internet.htm
That is a big No No. The TOS state that the work must be original and your own work. I agree with lobo and missolive comments.
How is it being creative, to steal other peoples work and pass it off as your own. Not a good idea at all. People that do that are just cheating themselves and everyone else.
Thank you molometer - I could not agree more.
As far as I'm concerned NOTHING is open game. Copying someone else's content is plagiarism - period. Regardless if a formal copyright is in place or not.
If one of my student's copies someone else's answers or essay they will get an earful - trust me. If a fellow hubber or blogger or website uses one of my hubs they will also get an earful - it's called DMCA.
As for PLR sites - those articles are written for distribution and use. Such a business would not make it if they are simply violating copyright rules and plagiarizing. It would be illegal and a constant battle with DMCA.
But these articles that are used by others are put on their blogs or websites. You are supposed to give full credit to writer. Problem lies due to not reading the TOS of the site they are getting articles from, that may end up creating a duplicate content issue for original author. Some sites require that although you can use content, you have to acknowledge writer, and they recommend getting permission from author, but do not require it. People are buying PLR articles thinking they are the only one who has bought it, but thousands of others may have purchased the same artcle or using the same article from a Free PLR site.
LindaSmith1 - maybe you can explain this: I've cut and paste my own content from my word processor into the edit box on a new Hub that I'm creating, and I often get a warning that it's a violation to use anyone else's text on my Hub. The warning also includes the caveat that many writers edit their content offline then transfer it into their Hubs, which is fine - but it seems to specifically disallow cutting and pasting anyone else's text into their Hubs, whether or not attribution is included. I'll see if I can find anything in the TOS that specifically states this.
Copying an article and re-publishing it without permission from the original author, whether allowed by the site or not, whether attributed or not, is theft. Such practice is only done by thieves.
I had one hub copied and got into a debate (as did several other hubbers - he was a prolific thief) with the site owner - he felt that anything on the net was fair game and told us all so, even though quoted the pertinent law.
Eventually I gave up trying to convince him otherwise and went to the host. Within minutes the offending article was gone - they absolutely knew better. Stealing is stealing and it doesn't matter if you attribute it or not
I would think that it is a no no. I have put recipes but they are changed according to how I make them but as far as my informational hubs you shouldn't be allowed to merely copy and paste, it should be your own work.
The world goes beyond Hub pages and hubs where people post such as other article sites, blogs, websites, etc which are not part of Hub pages.
Van Gogh painted "Starry Night". Does that mean that I can hang it somewhere, and expect to be applauded for it?
"Van Gogh painted this, but I hung it nicely on this wall. Therefore, give me credit, too."
That's not the way it works... anywhere.
true - proper citing and keeping it extremely brief is important. Quotes are very important too. Glad to see you on the forums Daniella
If I want to post the Constitution in its entirety along with 5-600 words would that trigger duplicate content?
Would it not be allowed on HP?
I'm pretty sure the Constitution is public domain!
It pulled up a duplicate content warning when I tried to publish the hub. I immediately unpublished it so as to not cross HP TOS.
Interesting! After you pasted the content, did you try typing some other content into the box that was just your own words?
If you did, and it still brought up the warning, I guess that answers the question of whether or not the bulk of the Hub needs to be our own original content.
Half of the hub is my own words. I am rectifying the problem right now
Reality bytes; If you are using it as a reference for your hub to go with your own words and interpretation it can be inserted into your hub by saving it as a picture rather than as a text hub - then the reader can still read it, and you do not have "duplicate content".
capricornrising: it might be public domain, but it would violate Hubpages' TOS.
There are two different considerations.
1. Is it legal to copy it? That's copyright law, fair use, etc.
2. Is it against a particular site's house rules? Websites are publishers, and set rules about what can be published on their websites. This is not a contradiction of the first amendment. You can publish material yourself; The first amendment doesn't require every publisher you approach to publish your content for you.
In the case of duplicate content, we're talking about #2.
Hubpages, like many user-generated content sites, has to ban duplicate content, because Google will PENALIZE sites which are mostly a repository of content found elsewhere. Why should Google send traffic to a site that doesn't have much unique content?
We don't know how much copied content can exist on a site before Google starts penalizing the whole site. Probably, it's a sliding scale.
We do know that Google massively penalized Hubpages earlier in 2011 for this very reason. Everyone on the site suffered. Everyone lost traffic. So Hubpages is now cracking down on it more than it was before. It's no longer just removing copyright violations. It's now taking action against copied content even when it's fair use, public domain, or your own content posted on multiple sites.
Therefore, even though it might be legal to post a copy of the Constitution, it's a bad idea to post it on Hubpages, because Google might penalize all pages on Hubpages -- not only the duplicate ones -- by down-rating the whole domain for having too much copied content.
Hubpages relies on us to flag duplicate content so staff can double-check that the copy is, actually, the Hub, and not some jerk on another site stealing content.
Sure, Greekgeek - I agree in principle. But since I enjoy playing devil's advocate, I've got to ask how you would handle this scenario:
Say the topic of a hub is a close analysis of the text of the Preamble to the Constitution (We the People, etc.). In order to analyze the text, the hubber will obviously have to cut and paste into the hub the text he or she is going to analyze, in order to structure the hub in a way that flows best. If I were writing the hub, the best possible arc for the article would include the full text of the Preamble near the top of the hub. Otherwise the reader has a tougher time connecting analysis to original text. What does the hubber do, in the face of this strict, but somehow too-blanket policy, that, in my view, might diminish the quality of the resulting hub if enforced in the way it's currently being enforced?
Here's what's contained in the TOS that seems to apply:
"4. RESTRICTIONS AND PROHIBITIONS ON USE
In Your use of the Service You must abide by the following restrictions and prohibitions on use. As a Service User or Author, You may Not:
Publish Hubs or Hub Content that are identical to, substantially similar to, or derived from other Hubs and/or content published elsewhere on the Web. This applies even if You are the owner of that content and/or have the rights to publish that content online."
This is a post-Panda crack-down, and I get it, but strict application of this rule would slash the number of hubs published on this site, by maybe 50%-75%. Other than duplication/identical copying, seems it would also be very difficult to police.
Enforcing the rule might, however, encourage more Hubbers to get more creative and write their own words. I'm not sure it's necessary to post a hub that is almost entirely someone else's content. Quoting parts of someone else's contents should be permissible (in book reviews, analyses, etc.), but this prohibition does seem to go a long way toward unauthorized re-posting of our work by someone else.
I suppose then the issue would be proving we wrote it first if someone else copies it and posts it elsewhere (as some responders have already reported).
Another site took the research I did in one hub, copied it, linked to me, and then credited me. they then changed the content here and there. Great. Now their site ranks higher than mine. It was my work, but their site credits me. It doesn't seem right.
There's some serious misinformation here about copyright. An original work is copyrighted the second it is published and the original author holds that copyright. They need not do anything to obtain that copyright. It's effective by the mere publication of the article. Now, there might be some question as to whether it's the site that has the copyright or the author (depending on the terms at the site or compensation), but there's a copyright on every work published. In other words, you do not have the right to reprint anything that is not your original work. You do, however, have the right to publish snippets of the work as long as it doesn't infringe on the original copyright and provided you give proper attribution. This falls under the guidelines of fair use. This might be a quote from a long article, for example. If you are using something you found on the internet, as long as you are not impeding the flow of traffic to that article, you are probably within the bounds of fair use. However, if you are using enough of that article where a person would not want to go to that article, then you are probably outside the bounds of fair use.
Recipes are quite tricky because there's an element of fair use to a recipe. However, if you are just copying, then that's copyright infringement. A recipe can most likely be printed if you've changed elements of that recipe and created a different recipe.
Let's take a common situation that some people seem to be engaging in:
You find a recipe. You repost that recipe and provide a link to the original article/blog/site. Is that a violation of copyright law? Answer: yes.
You find an article. You repost that article and provide a link to the original article. Is that a violation of copyright law? Answer: yes.
You find an article. You take a chunk of it, enough to effectively render a visit to that article moot, and repost it with a link to the original. Is that a violation of copyright law? Answer: yes.
You are violating the law in all of the above cases unless the original author specifically relinquishes their copyright or the article is in the public domain.
by cupid516 years ago
Can I post an article to ezinearticles which I have already published in hubpages?
by Cindy Murdoch4 years ago
As I read and try to learn about the internet, I keep running across people talking about content spinners. Isn't the content that they create considered duplicate content? Or not? Does anyone use them for any other...
by kerryg5 years ago
I used to have an eHow account, but when they closed the Writer's Compensation Program back in May/June, I removed my articles from the site and deleted my account.A couple days ago, I republished one of the articles...
by Catherine Giordano16 months ago
Yesterday someone contacted me saying she wanted to reprint my hub "Does Religion do More Harm than Good" in her ezine. This is the link: http://churchandstate.org.uk/I was so flattered that I...
by Marisa Wright7 years ago
I was reading a Hub on Hubpages, and was concerned to read the advice that the content we use in our Hubs should be unique, not something we've posted elsewhere on the net.I started out on Helium and have nearly 200...
by Tall Clovers21 months ago
I've rewriiten a HubPages Story after receiving a duplicate post warning. I received another "duplicate post" message. It's not a duplicate post. The new version is almost all new. The only thing I didn't...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.