Half of my hub was copied, but it might send more views to my original

1. 96

   RonElFranposted 7 years ago

   A classic movie website copied half of my "Clark Gable Desegregated Gone With The Wind Movie Set" hub. Normally that's bad, but there are a couple of positives here. First, the site does link back to the hub, suggesting readers go there for more info. Second, for my chosen keywords, my original hub ranks #1 or #2 on Google, but for the keywords I was using when I stumbled across the copy, it's not in the top 100. Yet the copy ranks #2 for those keywords. This makes me think I'm not losing any views, and may pick up some by readers following the link.
   
   My question is whether I should take any action about the unauthorized copying, since I might actually be benefiting from it. What do you think?

   replyreport
   1. 58

      Orangenationposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Like you have stated Ron, this copied work points back to your original hub, seems good for business to me and should however justify the intentions of the Movie Website. Although there is a need to clarify with the website owners by communicating back to them so as to familiarize every conduct on your work. This is important..

      replyreport
2. 83

   Duane Townsendposted 7 years ago

   If it links back your original is it copying?
   Is it the 'read more here' technique?

   replyreport
   1. 96

      RonElFranposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The first half of the hub is copied word for word. That's a very substantial amount. So, yes, it is copying.
      
      But here's something I just realized. Over the past several days this hub has had thousands of views per day via Facebook. That pretty much corresponds to the time the copy went up on this web site. I'm wondering the Facebook run is due to the influence of this web site. Since its half-copy of my hub was not only indexed but reached #2 within 3 days, maybe this is a really popular site. I may have more to thank them for than I knew.

      replyreport
3. 85

   Marisa Wrightposted 7 years ago

   If someone is posting part of your Hub and linking to you, that's a good thing.  Personally I'd be happier if it was a third or a quarter of the Hub rather than a half, but it sounds like people are still clicking through to read more so that's great!

   replyreport
   1. 96

      RonElFranposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      That's the way I'm thinking at this point, Marisa.

      replyreport
   2. 83

      Duane Townsendposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Ron, I agree with Marisa, the link-back is gold.
      That's how a lot of sites acquire content. 'Copy' a third or even a half and direct the reader via link back to your Hub.

      replyreport
      1. 96

         RonElFranposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks, Duane. I didn't realize that this is something of a normal practice. But it does seem more of a benefit than a detriment.

         replyreport
4. 94

   alexadryposted 7 years ago

   Generally, I would think the most ethical way to do this is for the party that's using your content to use no more than 50 words with a link back to the original article. It sounds like from your description that the website has used a considerable amount, BUT, most likely it's what is driving traffic to you if you have noticed a surge. Back links are valuable for traffic purposes and many people actually pay for them. If people are going to your original it likely means that the website posting your link placed in such a way that it is acting as a "teaser" that perks people curiosity to read more. I have had some of my articles copied entirely with a link at the bottom which people never or rarely clicked on because they already got all the information they needed. Not fair and in these cases I requested my content to be taken down.
   
   However, the downfall is that you might be getting just a fraction of what traffic the website is actually getting from using your content if it's a popular one, which is not nice. However, once again the trade off is that you might be getting traffic that otherwise you might not have gotten in the first place, so it's likely a good thing were the benefits outweigh as long as Google keeps ranking you first. Consider though the traffic might be temporary due to the novelty effect and sharing through social media, therefore it might dwindle over time.

   replyreport