Adsense TOS: How do you read this blog post?

[paulgl]

If you don't know about the adsense blog, you should read it.
How does this grab you:

Fiction: Publishers can put ads on auto-generated pages or other copied content that was not created by them.

Fact: We don’t allow sites with auto-generated or otherwise unoriginal content to participate in the AdSense program. This is to ensure that our users are benefiting from a unique online experience and that our advertisers are partnering with useful and relevant sites.

AdSense Facts & Fiction Part V: Unoriginal content - Inside AdSense

When you read more into the post, it talks about passing content off as your own or
original.

Sometimes we come across sites that are using software to generate automated content. These sites might look like normal news sites, but the information is completely plagiarized. Scraping content and passing it off as one’s own is not only wrong, but it also happens to be a serious violation of our policies.

The first quote does not 100% coincide with the second one.

Seems like they are once again not drawing a line in the sand, but leaving a lot up to
interpretation. Until you get banned.

Paul

[yukon]

I read that blog post today.

I use public domain content on a few sites, & I'll keep running it. Been doing this for 4-years never had a problem.

Looks like their focus in that blog post is on scraping other sites feeds.

Which Google shouldn't say a word about since all their content is scraped.

[Zeb]

I've read that blog post as well and came to WF to see what other members thought of it.

Personally i think that google just wants to get publishers to write more original content. This is because that almost the whole of the net is filled with duplicate content. That's something that will exist forever.

I don't think it's much to worry about. However there's this tingly feeling at the back of my head that slightly worries me but thinking logically, how can google stop what is happening on the internet which is content will be used elsewhere (like it or not).

[OnlineMarketingSys]

It's saying if you have an autoblog, and they catch you, then your account will get banned. Pretty simple as that, plr or content that you have rights to is completely different (hence you have the rights to republish it).

[hilhilginger]

I am really confused after reading this blog. I am afraid I should remove my adsense code from third pary bloging sites. But it was working fine for last couple of months.

[thebitbotdotcom]

I think Google talks from their butt much of the time. For example, take a look at EZA. They publish articles that have already been published on numerous sites. I know this from personal experience. They do it with my articles. Ususally, they are the last directory to approve it...and...they have Adsense ads plastered all over their pages, so Google apparently doesn't strictly enforce this. However, what it does allow them to do is deindex any site they don't "like" or that pisses them off on a whim. Then they can just say: "Oh, you violated our terms of service...sorry...go cry somewhere else."

[adsenselive]

I think they are meaning to imply if not actually imply, that it is the "Junk" scraper sites that they don't want running adsense

[paulgl]

I don't autoblog, but was in mind to scrape a little in the future.

The first quote seems to be a no-nonsense approach. That is, nothing
from other sites. But then after reading between the lines as the post
continues, it looks like they are really talking about junk sites. But what
defines a junk site? They talk about a site disguised as a real news site.
Well, seems to me that would not be a junk site. Every news site uses
copied content and feeds from AP, Reuters, CNN, etc.

So what are they really talking about? Again, must be "junk" sites.

Since google seems to have no real definition in this post, I take that
they will use this as a way of banning sites at their discretion, using
this as a reason.

If I was autoblogging, I would make dang sure that my site looked professional
and unique.

I don't use many EZA articles, but it seems even this would violate the terms
as stated. Does not make sense.

All autobloggers should take note. I may not continue with business as usual.

Paul

[Rsberg]

Originally Posted by paulgl

So what are they really talking about? Again, must be "junk" sites.

I'm fairly confident this is what they are referring to. I know several people (myself included) who have had Adsense on automated sites for some time and have had no issues.

Originally Posted by paulgl

If I was autoblogging, I would make dang sure that my site looked professional
and unique.

This is one of the keys to not only keeping your account active but making money with autoblogging as a whole.

Build quality sites that offer value to the reader and the net and you wont have any problems...and yes, you can do this with autoblogs.

[Fraggler]

I read those 2 statements as:

1. Don't use scraped content.
2. Don't use content that you don't own.
3. Especially don't scrape content that you don't own and make it appear like you do own it.

I guess it is a matter of who they think owns the original content.

Reading the whole post though I think they are taking a dig at the (mediocre) autoblog sites that are ripping off other peoples work on a mass level and profiting. The BH sites are full of people doing this.

There are guys who will do it over a range of subdomains hoping to get a little bit from each with no credit to the original articles. This is a breach of copyright so these guys shouldn't be suprised that Google is booting them out.

Edit: The comments are gold!

[paulgl]

Originally Posted by Fraggler

I read those 2 statements as:

1. Don't use scraped content.
2. Don't use content that you don't own.
3. Especially don't scrape content that you don't own and make it appear like you do own it.

Yeah. #1 and #2 are black and white. The post then seems to make special note
of sites that do bad things. It still leaves you wondering why the first statements
are so black and white, no gray.

I use content from google on many sites: Topical newsfeeds provided by google
specifically to publish on your website.

The whole post has to be directed to scraped sites for no reason other than to
put adsense on them.

Paul

[noble]

It seems pretty clear to me, not a lot of grey area there... Unless you're not seeing the part that says "fiction" meaning its not true...

[yukon]

Originally Posted by Fraggler

I read those 2 statements as:

1. Don't use scraped content.
2. Don't use content that you don't own.
3. Especially don't scrape content that you don't own and make it appear like you do own it.

I guess it is a matter of who they think owns the original content.

Reading the whole post though I think they are taking a dig at the (mediocre) autoblog sites that are ripping off other peoples work on a mass level and profiting. The BH sites are full of people doing this.

There are guys who will do it over a range of subdomains hoping to get a little bit from each with no credit to the original articles. This is a breach of copyright so these guys shouldn't be suprised that Google is booting them out.

Edit: The comments are gold!

What about Public Domain content?

I didn't create the Public Domain content, but I have every right to post it on my site, & in an automated way If I wanted to.

Fact: We don’t allow sites with auto-generated or otherwise unoriginal content to participate in the AdSense program. This is to ensure that our users are benefiting from a unique online experience and that our advertisers are partnering with useful and relevant sites.

I'm not automated but If I wanted to I'll post any/all Public Domain content on my Adsense sites.

Google needs to delete that blog post & have someone that's never worked for the IRS write a new detailed blog post.

Business as usual...

[Fraggler]

Originally Posted by yukon

I didn't create the Public Domain content, but I have every right to post it on my site, & in an automated way If I wanted to.

You do have every right. It sounds like it might be against Google's AdSense TOS though so you would have to monetise it differently.

They aren't saying these people are breaking any laws, just their AdSense rules.

Who knows how they police it?

I think Paul is on the money about putting a warning out to people making autoblogs just for AdSense income. If the site is built with the end-user in mind then you should be cool bananas.

[rich_henderson]

I think that google if they target anything are going to be going after autoblogs which scrape content from other sites without permission and claim it as their own.

If you build sites with content from sites that permit you to share content like articlesbase as long as you attribute that content to them in the form of a backlink I can't see google having a problem with it.

If is is the non unique stuff they are after then they are going to lose 80+ percent of the pages they have their ads on. I can't see them doing that somehow.

If you autoblog ethically ie always include any original links back to the source I think it will be ok for now.

I dare say we shall be inundated with linkbait over the next few weeks with wannabee gurus claiming autoblogging is dead and then releasing some kind of alternative course, happens every time google send out messages.

I'd also put money on whoever it is knowing absolutely nothing about autoblogging and just playing on newbie marketers fears to make a buck, par for the course unfortunately.

Anyway when it happens can someone post a link so I can make sure it goes viral, panic = less competition for me