Is Auto-Blog Illegal?

[robson9776]

Dear Warriors,

I just want to ask you a question...

Is doing auto-blog, that is grabbing content from Amazon, Yahoo Answer, etc... illegal thing to do and the owner can get sued by them?

thanks...

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by robson9776

Dear Warriors,

I just want to ask you a question...

Is doing auto-blog, that is grabbing content from Amazon, Yahoo Answer, etc... illegal thing to do and the owner can get sued by them?

thanks...

I wouldn't say "illegal". In my opinion, people, who put content on *public* zine sites and who offer RSS feeds from their sites should be aware of the implications. You cant put content on ezine and then act all suprised finding your article all over the web in a few weeks

Different story if you would just "copy" content from amazon. As for Yahoo answers..as far as i know it is legit, but Yahoo answers needs a disclaimer in regards to the origin. ("Powered by Yahoo answers")

[robson9776]

I agree with you about article directories and RSS, but still have a doubt with Amazon and Yahoo Answer, because there's Wordpress plugins can do it perfectly...

I just want to play clean in this IM world...

[Ethan F.]

I think "auto-blog" excites newbies and makes them think that IM is easy automatic traffic and riches. So it should be illegal lol.

[GeorgR.]

I had a few people "finding" their article on some of my autoblogs - as long as the link back to THEIR site is intact its usually ok. Free backlinks for them

[SaSeoPete]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

I had a few people "finding" their article on some of my autoblogs - as long as the link back to THEIR site is intact its usually ok. Free backlinks for them

Thats exactly it. I really don't mind auto bloggers. Just write 1 article in the finiance niche and submit it to a few article directories, you will get tons of autoblogs picking it up and the trackbacks will come in thick and fast.

I don't auto blog myself, but I sure do love em easy backlinks...

[JeffLam]

I doubt it is illegal.

It works similar to how RSS directories auto post newest RSS feeds.

Unless you are somehow spamming the website or otherwise, it should be legal.

The question is: what you using this site for that simply posts content from Amazon and Yahoo answers?

Quick way to get high up in the SERPs? Fast way to build content?

If your site is a mess of such content with no direction..unless you plan to bank on adsense for income..well, I'm not sure how it's workable.

Not saying that it's not of course! Just want to tell you to do your research right first before you venture too far out.

[robson9776]

no, bro... I'm done with Adsense...

Originally Posted by JeffLam

I doubt it is illegal.

It works similar to how RSS directories auto post newest RSS feeds.

Unless you are somehow spamming the website or otherwise, it should be legal.

The question is: what you using this site for that simply posts content from Amazon and Yahoo answers?

Quick way to get high up in the SERPs? Fast way to build content?

If your site is a mess of such content with no direction..unless you plan to bank on adsense for income..well, I'm not sure how it's workable.

Not saying that it's not of course! Just want to tell you to do your research right first before you venture too far out.

[JeffLam]

If that is so Rob, just be sure you do your proper research on the direction of your venture before you get too lost in the middle of it all.

[stephenraj]

Originally Posted by robson9776

Dear Warriors,

I just want to ask you a question...

Is doing auto-blog, that is grabbing content from Amazon, Yahoo Answer, etc... illegal thing to do and the owner can get sued by them?

thanks...

Though it's a illegal thing, many people are using this technique.

There's already a thread related to your query so just hopin their:

Is autoblogging legal?

[Pat Jackson]

I couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere to this question which is why I avoid using something like WP Robot.

Instead, I just scrape articles from directories that allow it so that I know I'm definitely not breaking any laws.

[redicelander]

Seems like it's really up to debate, but I see most marketers saying it is legal.

[Zeb]

As long as you use autoblogging the right way it's not illegal. Meaning leaving the articles pulled from article directories as it is with links intact and such. So autoblogging can be illegal if you want it to be or perfectly legit as long as you comply.

[ExRat]

Hi Robson9776,

Take the reviewazon plugin which can pull reviews, descriptions and images (amongst other things) from Amazon.

The content is pulled via their AWS (Amazon web services).

Do you not think that they would have something to say to the 1000s of affiliates who use these plugins and Amazon services to populate their websites, if it were illegal?

Is doing auto-blog, that is grabbing content from Amazon, Yahoo Answer, etc... illegal thing to do and the owner can get sued by them?

If you want to go down this route and want to make sure that you don't get sued - then you now have the answer that asking on forums, while helpful, is not conclusive. And even if all of the answers here appeared to be conclusive, are you willing to risk your liberty on the opinions of a bunch of strangers?

It's good that you bother to ask - but take it a step further and find out for sure, for yourself.

[getsmartt]

In general read the terms of service (TOS) of your sources and use some common sense.
If you are getting Content from Amazon, don't use it to promote other Affiliates.
If you are using Yahoo Answers make sure you give them proper credit.
If you are using Article Directories make sure you keep th resource block in place.
If you are using RSS Feeds or other blog content make sure you are complying with their TOS or get their permission.

[crazyraymond]

I'm pretty sure it's legit for Amazon at least. They provide me an RSS feed with my affiliate ID attached to it and everything. Newegg too.

[DogScout]

RSS feeds can have permissions embedded in them. The most I see are Creative Commons 3.0 which means you can use the content, even change it but must give away the resulting 'product' (which if it is on your blog you are giving it away) and give attribution, meaning credit the original author. (I do see some that say no use at all or licensed use only which means paying a fee, such as some news organizations have.)

If you stick to those 3.0 CC RSS feeds and as said above keep resource boxes intact, include the 'powered by Yahoo answers' or whatever the terms require, it is not illegal from what I have deduced. It can be un-targeted and of questionable value to the visitor maybe (although they might not have found the information otherwise) but when targeted using keywords can produce traffic and sell products.

So while I am not enamored of them, they are a legitimate IM tool when used correctly & like any other IM tool they can be mis-used as well. (I have played in my mind as whether to pursue their use or not. I have seen some horrible uses of it that look like poop, but have also seen properly configured auto blogs that look decent and as also mentioned above can help the original author get traffic to their blog or article directory.

Anyway, that is the findings I have come up with while looking at whether to use them myself. (Which I may eventually do, dunno yet, still cannot decide. Lol) Of course do your own DD. You may find out stuff different or more than my meager discoveries.

[getsmartt]

Originally Posted by DogScout

RSS feeds can have permissions embedded in them. The most I see are Creative Commons 3.0 which means you can use the content, even change it but must give away the resulting 'product' (which if it is on your blog you are giving it away) and give attribution, meaning credit the original author. (I do see some that say no use at all or licensed use only which means paying a fee, such as some news organizations have.)

This is not necessarily true, there are several CC licenses and some of them do not allow you to use content Commercially

From the CC Site

The Licenses



Attribution

This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation. This is the most accommodating of licenses offered, in terms of what others can do with your works licensed under Attribution.




Attribution Share Alike

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work even for commercial reasons, as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms. This license is often compared to open source software licenses. All new works based on yours will carry the same license, so any derivatives will also allow commercial use.




Attribution No Derivatives

This license allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to you.




Attribution Non-Commercial

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.




Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms. Others can download and redistribute your work just like the by-nc-nd license, but they can also translate, make remixes, and produce new stories based on your work. All new work based on yours will carry the same license, so any derivatives will also be non-commercial in nature.




Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives

This license is the most restrictive of our six main licenses, allowing redistribution. This license is often called the “free advertising” license because it allows others to download your works and share them with others as long as they mention you and link back to you, but they can’t change them in any way or use them commercially.

[Chris Worner]

I don't think people necessarily mind if their content is re-posted as long as it is unmodified and the links are intact, as pointed out above more links for you. and credit is given.

[DogScout]

The 3.0 I think is the 4th one down. I don't know whether posting to a blog that has affiliate links on it is considered commercial use or not. If so, you'd need the 2nd one down (I don't know the number)

Good info!

[dspa72]

It depends on the content you grab. That's all.
Try to use content which is not copyrighted and you are safe

[getsmartt]

Originally Posted by DogScout

The 3.0 I think is the 4th one down. I don't know whether posting to a blog that has affiliate links on it is considered commercial use or not. If so, you'd need the 2nd one down (I don't know the number)

Good info!

Actually 3.0 refers to the entire CC licensing scheme and not a particular license, kinda confusing I know, but all of the licensing schemes I listed are part of CC3.0 just with different rights attributed or withhelld.

As far as noncommercial use goes here is what CC has to say...

Is use X a violation of the Noncommercial clause of the licenses?

Depends. Determining what does and doesn't constitute commercial use is not always easy. We are aware of the complications related to drawing a line between commercial and noncommercial use and are working to clarify the issue.
If you are really in doubt about whether a particular use violates the noncommercial term of a CC license, we recommend that you use works that are explicitly licensed for commercial use (for example, material under our BY, BY-SA, and BY-ND licenses). Alternatively, you may wish to approach the licensor directly to see if you need to discuss a commercial use agreement.

...ambigious at best LOL

[getsmartt]

Originally Posted by dspa72

It depends on the content you grab. That's all.
Try to use content which is not copyrighted and you are safe

All content is copyrighted unless it is in the Public Domain!

[A P Geofrey]

Even though auto blogging some how is legal I would rather like it to be illegal. Well just my opinion. I hate all the "autos" except that in automobile. Don't ask me why.

[JeedoAquino]

Hi rob,

Autoblogging in itself is not illegal. The use it however may break some terms of agreement depending on which site you are pulling content from. I suggest you read the legal agreement first before you pull out data from any website for your autoblog.

[dawny22]

I didn't realise you could just copy and paste other people's content from e-zines! I would spin them alittle at least though, but i suppose it depends on the application.

[Summer1]

In my opinion Autoblog is not illegal, if you give the links back to the original sites, its like free backlinks to them.

Worse is blog which really copy and paste exactly the same content. I have known some blogs which do have exactly same content from another blogs, and not putting a link back. That's worse than autoblogging.

Autoblogs however, do have "low quality" contents.

[andreasnrb]

Obviously it is a copyright violation to repost stuff that you don't have permission to repost. It should be common sense. Its basically in essence what the whole Pirate Pay, RIAA, MPAA etc is about.
Claiming , in your defence, that you are providing link backs is a mute point, the copyright violation is still being made.

[Rsberg]

Originally Posted by dawny22

I didn't realise you could just copy and paste other people's content from e-zines! I would spin them alittle at least though, but i suppose it depends on the application.

You can't simply copy and past articles from ezine articles and spinning them would violate their TOS.

There is nothing illegal about autoblogging...unelss you do something like this and even then I doubt it would be considered "illegal"...but it certainly would be unethical.

There is a way to do it legally and ethically...just follow the rules of the sites you get content from and you will be fine.

[Rsberg]

Originally Posted by Summer1

Autoblogs however, do have "low quality" contents.

Not necessarily...this is totally dependent upon the individual building the site. I have several auotblogs and consider the content on them to be very good quality. The difference is that I spend a little more time picking the content that is posted to my sites initially than some do.

Originally Posted by andreasnrb

Claiming , in your defence, that you are providing link backs is a mute point, the copyright violation is still being made.

This only happens if you are posting content from sites that don’t allow this. I realize you stated this but somehow people tend to focus on the bolded portion above instead of the meaning of the entire comment.

[alamest]

What I believe nothing is automatic, manual is always best because it is human mind.

For example which one is good in cars automatic or manual...so think in this way when you do practice for racing will you use automatic or manual gear.. off course manual car why because you need understand what the gear does with the engine simple is that..

So before going to automatic what I suggest go manual and I know there is hard work behind but need to learn how does it works and than can move to automatic.

Manual takes time but it is worth..which off course depends of human patiences

I hope this helps to understand which one to go for automatic or manual..

Thanks
Alam

[Peter76]

Its not illegal at all if done properly. For instance with my wordpress blogs I use wprobot which imports articles with full credit and a backlink to the author's site. Those authors know that their articles are going to be posted on blogs and Im sure they don't mind aslong as proper credit is given.

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by Peter76

Those authors know that their articles are going to be posted on blogs

How do they know, Peter?

Originally Posted by Peter76

Im sure they don't mind aslong as proper credit is given.

What makes you "sure"?

In my experience, when people say, of a really large group, "I'm sure they don't mind", it's almost invariably the case that some mind and others don't. Might that be true here, also?

[robvegas626]

With articles, as long as you post their backlink, they should be happy for the link and the exposure. With YouTube videos that your autoblog picks up, you might receive the occasional complaint from someone whose video was randomly picked up and displayed on your blog...sometimes your autoblog plugin will pick up some really random stuff. I always though that anyone who posts a video of themselves (or their band) on YouTube was hungry for any exposure they can get...but I find that they get irritated when your blog post winds up out-ranking their actual website! It can happen easily when you've got a well-optimized Wordpress autoblog posting this stuff...

[Rsberg]

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

How do they know, Peter?

I think what he should have said (and possibly meant) was that they should know. To my knowledge WP Robot only pulls articles from directories that allow for this and state that in their TOS. If an author posts an article to a site that allows for this in their TOS and the author doesn’t know this is it the fault of the autoblogger who posts the content?

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

In my experience, when people say, of a really large group, "I'm sure they don't mind", it's almost invariably the case that some mind and others don't. Might that be true here, also?

Certainly...

I can't speak for the poster you responded to but as for myself (and many others I know) if they do mind and inform me of their displeasure in my posting their article I am quick to apologize and take it off my site.

[sam770]

Originally Posted by robson9776

Dear Warriors,

I just want to ask you a question...

Is doing auto-blog, that is grabbing content from Amazon, Yahoo Answer, etc... illegal thing to do and the owner can get sued by them?

thanks...

its not illegal but its getting more and more worthless
Google announced a bout 3 weeks ago that such websites will be filtered

[Rsberg]

Originally Posted by sam770

its not illegal but its getting more and more worthless
Google announced a bout 3 weeks ago that such websites will be filtered

Actually they said "content farms"...not the same as autoblogs really. They also said a few other things that have been in dispute as to how to interpret what they really meant.

No one can really decide what they (Google) did or did not mean without seeing some kind of measurable and lasting affect from the cause. I have however heard of some regular blogs (unique content sites) dropping in the ranks (post algo change) and there has been mention of this here in the WF as well.

I've spoken with many other autobloggers and (like them) none of my sites have been affected and their "worth" hasn't decreased yet, at least you couldn't prove that by comparing earnings from pre autoblog destruction rumors to their performance now.