Is autoblogging legal?

[jswift]

I noticed many folks here talk about how to create autoblogging websites, by taking content from RSS feeds or the likes.

I don't know if its legal but it sure doesn't sound ethical. However it seems like a common and rather successful practice on this forum. Any advice if its a.) legal and b.) effective?

[JayXtreme]

Legal? It's a minefield.... I'm not a lawyer, so can't give you this advice. A public forum is probably not the best place to go for advice on the legalities of something..

Effective? Yes, when used effectively

Peace

Jay

[Vince N]

Yes, its legal. Just beware of some webmasters and don't use your main blogs for autoblogging. Use throwaway sites only.

Its effectiveness? In my experience it hasn't been very positive.

[sbucciarel]

As for legal ... yes, it's legal. If you do it the right way, with full attribution back to the source, most webmasters like the link back to their blog .... a few will complain and you just simply stop using their rss feeds.

[bgmacaw]

As long as syndication permission is given by the content provider it's perfectly OK. This is often the case with article directories, press release feeds, some news feeds and others. Most regular blogs do not give permission though.

[Kurt]

There's nothing wrong with using automation. The questions/problems arise as to how you supply your system with content.

It's the content that you need to worry about. There's plenty of legit ways to auto-blog, including using your own original content, PLR, public domain, RSS pheeds you have permission to use, etc.

[angela99]

It's "legal", as long as you don't strip out URLs etc, and if you use the feeds with attribution. If you don't, expect people to complain. Then your blogs will be removed from search engine indexes; this means you've wasted your time.

As far as "effective" goes, auto-blogging tools come and go. A particular tool is promoted and is popular, but since all these tools leave a foot print, the search engines eventually weed all the blogs using the tool out, and the blogs disappear.

Then people fill forums with their tales of woe.

It's a cycle. A tool's popularity eventually leads to the death of the blogs using it.

Think about it. If you're just publishing material that's widely syndicated, you're not publishing anything new, just what's already in the search engine indexes. Why do the search engines need you? They don't. :-)

[jswift]

OK I agree if you have permission from the content owner then it's perfectly legal. However in any other case, why would it be legal? Don't blog owners have some form of copyright protection?

Is re-typing part of a newspaper article, without permission from the publisher, on your blog legal?

[Kezz]

I think the real key is you have to make sure you are giving back to the people whose feeds you are aggregating. If you do it right, you'll send them a tonne of traffic, and who can be cranky about that?

For example, one of my sites is all original, but our feeds are aggregated by another website that also displays other feeds in our subject area. That site sends us about 10% of all our traffic, which is no small amount. So, they can use our feeds till the end of time and we're happy about it.

[DogScout]

I believe, the RSS and ATOM feed services require a CC 3.o license which means it can be reused with credit.
Copy/pasting from a news service might get you in copyright trouble though.

If the autoblogging software spins the text, ther is no dup content. the CC license allows changes.

(Don't quote me, I am not a lawyer, though I know a lot. I can call someone up at copyright and trademark and ask?)

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by jswift

OK I agree if you have permission from the content owner then it's perfectly legal. However in any other case, why would it be legal? Don't blog owners have some form of copyright protection?

Is re-typing part of a newspaper article, without permission from the publisher, on your blog legal?

Yes, blog owners have the same rights as anyone else. However, some believe offering RSS is "implied consent".

Also, many people submit their blogs to blog directories that allow for their RSS pheeds to be used.

And, www.feedburner.com (owned by google and a very popular RSS aggregator) has an option to "add this feed to your site", which most would consider permission.

You can also create your own content, add your twitter stream or other 2.0 resources, use merchant feeds, have a forum export as RSS were in the TOS you state you can do so, use PLR and/or public domain content, or even actually contact blog owners and do JVs with them, and more, and any combination.

[Kezz]

The completely safe, legit and above board way to autoblog is with content that has been put out specifically to share, or with content you have explicitly been allowed to share by companies you are an affiliate of.

For example, you can set up a densely populated and active autoblog using the WP-Robot plugin suite, and all the content is completely legal: WP Robot - Premium Wordpress Autoposting Plugin

[ezaaron]

There is plenty of content that people allow you to use. If you are cautious, why not create a RSS feed aggregation service, and ask other bloggers to sign up, give you their feed and permission to use the content in any way you want. They are willing to do this because they think it will help them out (and it may). There's a good idea!

[LegitBlogger]

Some folks DON'T care, so far as it works.
But it's a good thing to thread carefully.
I certainly don't like some lawyers coming
after me with crap I can't handle.

[chris11]

Originally Posted by jswift

I noticed many folks here talk about how to create autoblogging websites, by taking content from RSS feeds or the likes.

I don't know if its legal but it sure doesn't sound ethical. However it seems like a common and rather successful practice on this forum. Any advice if its a.) legal and b.) effective?

Once you link back to the blog you're getting your content from, it's legal. It may piss off a few people though. The best way to deal with it is to post a mean of communication (email addy) so the ones that don't like it can ask to be removed.

However, the autoblogging way can also be time/nerve consuming, plus it won't pull noticeable results if not done the right way.

One method I've seen successful is to get content from other sites, but, within each post, add some of your thoughts on the matter. If you're good at it, it'll get picked up fast.

Another way of using feeds is to put them in the sidebar as a mean of content only, and do your own posts on the main area where you promote your own stuff.

As with any other site, blogs do need links if you're counting on search engines traffic, so make sure you use bookmarking services, free ad sites, facebook, squidoo, whatever free resource is a good one. Even forums, if you find any related to your thing.

Hope this helps.

[chris11]

I also forgot to mention you'll have to use long tail keywords. Don't jump up for "make money online" as you'll never get number one. Use less trafficated keywords and you'll be just fine.

[Marian]

Originally Posted by Kurt

There's nothing wrong with using automation. The questions/problems arise as to how you supply your system with content.

It's the content that you need to worry about. There's plenty of legit ways to auto-blog, including using your own original content, PLR, public domain, RSS pheeds you have permission to use, etc.

I wouldn't say this better! There are tons of ways on how to do the autoblogging - and all legally. Use your stuff, outsourced stuff, combine with some news feeds, etc...

Marian