- Impact
- 23
Many pages are copying my content. Is Google smart enough to recognize that mine is the original?
My site was on first page of google results for my target keyword, but my index page recently disappeared completely from results. When I try to search for a string of text on my index page, my page does not show up, but a number of "site statistics" pages, such as pageinsider dot com, that have copied all of my text, show up. I believe that the copying is a fairly recent development and I suspect that it could be at least a factor to my index page disappearing from results.
Are the developers of the Google algorithm smart enough to keep track of who published content first? Even though it should be simple to do, I fear that they are not smart enough to do it.
They don't appear to be smart enough to recognize that "site statistics" pages are very unlikely to be of interest to the vast majority of web surfers (or maybe they just havent't been able to figure out a way to filter out content that would probably only interest specific webmasters).
What's the verdict? Should I try to get these useless sites to remove my copyrighted content? Or is that a useless never ending battle? Or is the copied content not a concern at all?
---------- Post added at 04:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 AM ----------
Along those lines, are backlinks from useless sites that are not copying all of my content but also add no value and often also practice cloaking harmful to my site?
Is it reasonable to assume that if Google considered backlinks from such sites to be a negative, Google would (try to) stop such sites from placing well?
My site was on first page of google results for my target keyword, but my index page recently disappeared completely from results. When I try to search for a string of text on my index page, my page does not show up, but a number of "site statistics" pages, such as pageinsider dot com, that have copied all of my text, show up. I believe that the copying is a fairly recent development and I suspect that it could be at least a factor to my index page disappearing from results.
Are the developers of the Google algorithm smart enough to keep track of who published content first? Even though it should be simple to do, I fear that they are not smart enough to do it.
They don't appear to be smart enough to recognize that "site statistics" pages are very unlikely to be of interest to the vast majority of web surfers (or maybe they just havent't been able to figure out a way to filter out content that would probably only interest specific webmasters).
What's the verdict? Should I try to get these useless sites to remove my copyrighted content? Or is that a useless never ending battle? Or is the copied content not a concern at all?
---------- Post added at 04:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 AM ----------
Along those lines, are backlinks from useless sites that are not copying all of my content but also add no value and often also practice cloaking harmful to my site?
Is it reasonable to assume that if Google considered backlinks from such sites to be a negative, Google would (try to) stop such sites from placing well?
Last edited:









