jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (5 posts)

I will take your Hub and publish a better version of it under my name.

  1. Haunty profile image84
    Hauntyposted 4 years ago

    No, I won't. I just want to know your opinion about this practice.

    Over the past couple of months I have seen an increase in the number of times whereby certain Hubbers take the Hubs of others and rewrite them using the exact same structure and publish them under their own username. Typically, these are Hubs that can be found on SERP 1 of Google for the keyword used in the Hub title.

    I noticed that the hubs are often completely rewritten with more SEO applied, original images are used, etc. Only the structure is copied and the idea is stolen.

    The Hubs I've seen also tend to be somewhat shorter and less informative than the original.

    Should any action be taken when one discovers such a Hub/practice?

  2. WriteAngled profile image92
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    I think it really depends a lot on the individual situation. The occasions when it would be possible to prove this was the case would not be that frequent, in my opinion, unless identical wording was used in part of such a hub.

    There is a certain logical way to structure an article in many cases, and often there are also obvious things to say within it.

    For example, there was a hubbub on the forums recently when someone accused someone else of stealing a hub. If I remember correctly, it was about things to do with children on a rainy day. Well, that is not exactly an esoteric topic! There must be tens of thousands of such articles floating round the Web, and probably a huge overlap between the ideas suggested.

    Perhaps, if it was some very original idea about making something unusual, or a very obscure topic, there might be some rationale for assuming deliberate copying. Even then, the information being presented might have been found independently by the two authors from the same source (online, or offline even) and reworked into hubs. In that case, both could be considered plagiarists!

  3. Haunty profile image84
    Hauntyposted 4 years ago

    In the case of the Hub I saw today that made me post this in the first place, the topic is certainly not that original. The similarities are: titles almost the same, H2 headings same and in the same order, both Hubs start with an image of the same things floated to the right. It is almost certain that the Hubber drew at least some inspiration from the original Hub, however, as you suggest it's entirely possible that's all there is to it.

  4. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 4 years ago

    Hmm, I would probably flag it and let the moderators make a decision. It is against TOS to have similar or identical content.


    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.

    1. Aficionada profile image93
      Aficionadaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks for posting that, rebekahELLE.  I had planned to mention that the two Hubs seem to be "substantially similar" and should be brought to the moderators' attention, and then I saw that you had already done so. 

      I'm interested to see (in the excerpt) that it also applies to our own content!  I wonder how many Hubbers are actually aware of that restriction.