High Rankings Advisor: Copyright Law and SEO - Issue No. 077October 29, 2003 ________________________________________________________ ~~~IN TODAY'S ADVISOR~~~ *Introductory Comments: ----> Last Chance To Sign Up *Search Engine Marketing: ----> Are the Bad Guys Winning at Google? *This Week's Sponsors: ----> Jill's High Rankings Tampa Seminar ----> Nitty-gritty Special Report *Guest Article: ----> Copyright Law and SEO *Stuff You Might Like: ----> Yahoo Shopping PPC *High Rankings Forum Thread of the Week: ----> Acquiring New Customers *This Week's Sound Advice: ----> Beware of Marketers Bearing Browser Keywords *Advisor Wrap-up: ----> See You in NYC and Tampa ________________________________________________________ ~~~Introductory Comments~~~ Hey guys! This is it...the last week before my Tampa search engine marketing seminar. There's still time to get in on the fun. It's a whole day of learning everything there is to know about search engine marketing and search engine optimization. Get more info and register here: </77seminar>. On to the good stuff! - Jill ~~~Search Engine Marketing Issues~~~ ++Are the Bad Guys Winning at Google?++ Hello Jill, First off, thank you for your informative and straightforward newsletter. I see Google in a different light than you. [Last week you said] "As long as Google is still around and still focused on relevancy..." Google is more concerned with inbound links than relevancy and they are ripe for misrepresentation if you have the money. If you search for "gas scooters" on Google you will see that the same company owns 9 of the top 10 spots. The same company pays for their text links at a very large, PageRank 6 site then interlinks all of the sites. If this sounds like sour grapes, it's because it is. You can't compete against money and brute force if you are small. Thanks again, Mike ++Jill's Response++ When I first read Mike's email, I basically thought of it as just another complaint from someone looking for a scapegoat because he couldn't get high rankings himself. However, I received several similar emails from other subscribers over the past week. They were all concerned about their own Web sites' ability to be ranked highly when there were companies dominating the search engine results pages (SERPs) through apparently deceptive means. So, are the bad guys really winning at Google? Unfortunately, for many keyword phrases, it appears that they are. I looked at the results for the gas scooter phrase Mike mentioned and yes indeed, I was aghast at the tricks being used on many of the top sites. I found every trick in the book, in fact. After doing a bit of digging, I even found some subtle clues that makes me think that I know which "SEO firm" is helping them. One of the things I found were high-PageRanked sites, cross-linked with other high-PageRanked sites of the same genre, with numerous keyword phrases in the hyperlinks. Checking backlinks on these sites was also interesting because I found pages that were cloaking, pages that were stuffing image alt attribute tags and other things that I thought were passé in Google. Apparently they're not at all passé. Surfing the sites with a Lynx browser was very revealing because JavaScript doesn't work with Lynx, so I saw lots of stuff I wasn't supposed to see. The bigger question that I have to ask, however, is how does the person looking for gas scooters feel about these results at Google? Are they getting what they want? Are they happy with the results? Are they relevant to their query? At first glance it appears that they are. This may certainly be all that Google cares about. I don't know -- I'm not Google. Perhaps Google really does only care that the results are relevant and the means used to place them there are of no consequence. We know that their first priority is the user. As long as they're happy, Google is happy. I guess they are happy...? The thing is, I've always kind of thought that they did care. Maybe I'm wrong. Or maybe they're just a little bit mixed up right now. Or maybe there's just no way for Google to spot these techniques and we should all just use them. Okay, I wouldn't actually go that far! Many of the techniques being used on these sites have been penalized in the past. I've seen that sort of cross-linking thing get sites PR0'd (penalized) many times. Perhaps Google's PR0 penalty thingamabob is just broken? Come to think of it, I remember that I wrote something similar </issue051.htm#seo> way back in April of this year regarding the SERP for the phrase "email marketing consultant." If it was just a bug, surely it would be fixed by now -- over 6 months later. A quick check shows that nope, Google is still full of sites using deceptive optimization techniques. So what's up, Google? Tell me it isn't so. Tell me that you still believe in good vs. evil and that the ends don't justify the means. Cuz right now, you're telling me that it does, and that makes me sad. As to Mike and the others who have to compete in this space, all I can say is keep at it. You can keep making your sites better and better. You can continue to build up high-quality backlinks to your site. I took a quick look at Mike's site, and Google is not showing any backlinks. He does have links, but they're not yet considered high-enough quality to count for much. I didn't notice any high-quality directory links pointing to Mike's site, which might make a difference. Keep at it. Build up a great resource site all about your gas scooters. Invite others to write articles about their gas-scootering experiences, and whatever else you can think of. We have no control over Google's rankings. If they choose to let deceptive sites win, eventually the overall quality of Google will deteriorate. I'm sure they don't want that to happen. They have a very tough job having to fight spammers every single day. The thing is, when they err on the side of penalizing too many sites, then everyone is up in arms because they got caught up in spam filters by mistake. I'm confident that eventually Google will find a happy middle ground and someday be able to automatically tell the difference between sites that got there because they are truly the most relevant, and sites that deceptively appear to be the most relevant. Could be a long wait though. If you believe that another site is abusing Google's quality guidelines, feel free to report it to them here: <http://www.google.com/contact/spamreport.html>. Don't expect any miracles, however. __________________________________________________ High Rankings Seminar in Tampa with Jill and the Gang Learn search engine marketing from the ground up! __________________________________________________ Looking for a complete overview of search engine optimization? Join Jill and her merry band of search engine marketing experts in sunny Tampa, Florida on Nov. 7 for a full day of learning and fun! Learn SEO copywriting, Titles and Meta tags, search engine no-nos, choosing keywords, link pop., PPC, measuring success and more! Register now! </77seminar> __________________________________________________ ~~~Guest Article~~~ ++Copyright Law and SEO++ Ian McAnerin, one of our High Rankings Forum moderators, writes today's article. Ian is a former lawyer, and the founder of McAnerin Networks Inc., a Canadian-based search engine optimization company. He posts some great stuff on the forum, and is generally our expert when it comes to anything to do with Internet law and ethics. Copyright Law and SEO By Ian McAnerin What Is Copyright? Copyright literally means "the right to copy." This "copying" can be in the form of translated or derivative versions, reproductions, public or private distributions, displays, or broadcasts. As SEOs, we encounter copyright issues all the time. One of the most important things we bring to a client - unique, effective, keyword-rich content - is the very thing copyright law serves to protect. A computer can't just spit copy out. It is this creative element that helps to make a site stand out well in the search engine rankings. Google isn't interested in indexing the same content over and over again, and it removes duplicate computer-generated "landing pages" whenever it finds them in its results. By offering fresh, informative content you help your clients' websites achieve high rankings without the costs of pay-per-click, banner ads, etc. This translates into more money in your clients' pockets for the same (and often better) results and traffic. Naturally this content is worth a lot to you and your client. Unfortunately, there are many people in the world who do not respect the basic principles of fairness. Rather than coming up with their own content, they simply steal yours. Even worse, once they have stolen your content, it's no longer "unique" and therefore not as likely to be ranked highly in the search engines. In some cases, such as when the infringer's site has more link popularity, your site might drop out of the results altogether. In the past, copyright violators had to go through some effort and expense in order to do their deed. Today a perfect digital image of an original picture, literary work or sound recording can be copied and transmitted to millions of people almost instantly. The ease of this transmission, along with its high quality, has created a whole new generation of people who seem to feel that anything that can be found on the Internet is or should be free for the taking. How Do I Copyright My Work? Easy -- do something creative and original and commit it to some form of recording. An oral speech is not copyrightable, but as soon as it's recorded or written down, that recording is automatically copyrighted. There is no need to register something in order to obtain copyright protection. You can't copyright ideas, equations, thoughts, names, data, or things that should instead be patented, trademarked, or registered as an industrial design. You can copyright web copy, articles, musical recordings, video recordings, photos, designs, computer programs and most artwork. How Do You Prove Your Work Is Your Own? One way is to register it. This is a method by which you make a copy of your work and register it with a third party who can provide proof that you had this information as of a specific time. For example, you could burn your website to a CD, and register that. There are several reasons to register your copyrighted material -- first, you have proof on file. Second, registration creates an automatic assumption in the courts that your copyright is valid and that all your statements in the application for it are true. Third, in the US you are then able to take advantage of several statutory advantages that are not available otherwise. If you don't register it, your options are more limited, but they are still available. Some people use the Wayback Machine <http://www.archive.org> to show an approximate publication time, but if your site is new or not indexed this may not help you. You can also point to file dates and so forth, but on the Internet, as you can imagine, these things are easy to forge. Some Popular Misconceptions In the old days, if you didn't have a copyright symbol and date on your copyrighted work you were in trouble. This is no longer the case in most countries. The format is usually: Copyright (c) 2003 Your Name. All Rights Reserved. It's really hard for an infringer to stand up in court and say he didn't know it was copyrighted when this notice is at the bottom of the pages he stole the content from. In order to receive protection under the Berne Convention, you were originally required to use the (c) symbol, but most countries have changed that requirement. I would strongly recommend using it though. Remember that if you become aware of a copyright infringement and choose not to enforce your rights, you may find yourself prevented ("estopped") from complaining the next time. Always defend your rights. Even if it's minor, at the very least tell the infringer that they must request your permission in writing. Fair Use and other Defenses There are times when you can legitimately use someone's copyrighted materials. Since this is also one of the defenses infringers use, it's important to know what fair use is, and isn't. Fair use (also called fair dealing in Canada) basically covers the ability to make copies of a work for "legitimate" purposes. This includes the ability for you to print off a copy of a web page at home for personal research purposes, and for public review, criticism or news reporting. It does not cover the copying of all or substantially all of a work for public display. In short, if you rip off an article or artwork from someone else's website, and then make some minor formatting changes and perhaps alter a byline and a bit of text, and then post it as your own, you are clearly and obviously infringing copyright. There is a very fine distinction between fair use and infringement, and there is no specific amount or percentage that is "safe." Quoting a few lines is safe, quoting the whole article is not. In Canada, fair dealing for criticism, news or review requires a full citation to the original author. This is not required in the US, but I would recommend it anyway. Ian McAnerin McAnerin Networks Inc. http://www.mcanerin.com/ _____________Nitty-gritty Special Report_________________ Want to learn how to write for high rankings in the search engines? __________________________________________________ If you don't have the time or money to see Jill's Writing for the Search Engines presentation at conferences or seminars, for only $49 you can learn it all in her informative, quick-read report. Download the Nitty-gritty of Writing for the Search Engines today! </nittyhra77> __________________________________________________ ~~~Stuff You Might Like~~~ ++Yahoo Shopping PPC++ I had a neat demo today with the good people of Yahoo, where I learned all about their new paid-inclusion/PPC shopping feeds. If you've ever bought anything online, you may have used Yahoo Shopping's awesome comparison shopping tools before. For many years, I've found them to be invaluable when I want to make a major purchase such as a video camera, a new TV and that sort of thing. They're sporting a new look, which you can see here: <http://shopping.yahoo.com/>. It's very nice! In the past, they only listed major retailers who could afford to be listed in that section, but recently they've changed things so that any site that sells products can submit to them. If your or your clients' sites fit the bill, you should definitely look into getting listed there. They are spidering sites on their own, so you may find that you're already listed. However, if you want full control over how your products are represented, it may make sense to sign up for this new program. It sounds very similar to how Froogle works, except that Froogle is completely free at the moment. (See the guest article I published about Froogle here: </issue065.htm#guest>.) You can learn more about the costs per click for the various categories, and also how to sign up here: <https://productsubmit.adcentral.yahoo.com/>. If you test it out, send me an email to let me know how your return on investment works out. ~~~High Rankings Forum Thread of the Week~~~ ++Acquiring New Customers++ Interesting thread this week on the forum which provides lots of great information on ways you can gain new customers for your business: </forum/index.php?showtopic=155>. ~~~Sound Advice~~~ ++Beware of Marketers Bearing Browser Keywords++ </soundadvice> ~~~Advisor Wrap-up~~~ That's it for today! I'm going to have to skip next week's newsletter because I'll be in New York City on Wednesday speaking at the AdTech conference <http://www.ad-tech.com/>. From there I head out to sunny Tampa for the seminar on Friday </77seminar>. I'm looking forward to seeing my seminar speakers and helpers -- Scottie, Chris, Karon and Lee -- again, and also to meeting those of you that will be there. Look for us in the hotel bar/lounge/pub on Thursday night and stop by to say hi. Although we had a few bites, we didn't succeed in talking anyone into sponsoring a cocktail reception, so we'll just meet there informally. See you in NYC and/or Tampa! - Jill del.icio.us
|
|||