If you rewrite it line by line, is it fresh content or copyright violation?

[Jillian Slack]

Hi folks,

Here's a thought to ponder.

Let's say you have an article that you would like to rewrite and turn into "fresh" content.

What does that mean, exactly?

To rewrite something, do you:

a. Read the original article and then express the same basic information in your own words?

or

b. Take the original article, line by line, and rewrite each line?


It's definitely something to think about.

There have been MANY lawsuits filed over copyright infringement. I'm not an attorney. I'm a writer.

But from what I learned in media ethics classes, rewriting individual lines can be dangerous. If you're too close, it's a copyright violation.

So, if you choose to go the line-by-line route, be very careful.

I have seen documentation from lawsuits between two fiction writers whose novels were very similar. In one case that stands out in my mind, a great deal of lines in the novel were simply rewritten lines from the original.

Just today, I learned of a high-profile lawsuit. Elisabeth Hasselbeck from "The View" has a new book out. A self-published author has sued Hasselbeck for copyright violation.

Over a year ago, the self-pub author sent Hasselbeck a copy of her own book about the same topic.

Here's a link to papers filed:
http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/...selbeck_wm.pdf

There are some lines that are very close, and there are some chapter titles that are very close.

Of course, there are some similarities that can't be avoided, like a list of symptoms. I mean, it's a documented disease so OF COURSE there will be some duplicate content there. You can't throw in a few more symptoms that you've made up for the same of being different.

No judgment has been made in this case. No verdict. So we can't look at these passages and use them as examples of what to do or not to do when writing your own copy.

Just something to think about.

[Harry Behrens]

Jillian, I've tried the line-by-line rewriting thing and I've actually found it to be more work than just reading two different articles and then writing a new one that merges or relates the two ideas in some way.

Or say you have just one article, just turning it into another type of article is pretty easy:

- If the article is a step-by-step, turn it into a personal story of someone following the steps

- If it's a list of tips, turn it into a step-by-step of how to bring the tips together to accomplish whatever

- If it's an article explaining to a baby's mother how to do something, make the new one explain the same thing to the grandmother, or to the big sister, or the babysitter

And so on and so forth... It's very tempting to go line-by-line of course but there's much better ways to go about it.

About this lawsuit, I don't doubt for a second that Hasselbeck used that submitted book as inspiration for her own... I mean come on... but when does something stop being inspiration and turn into source material? That's a question with no easy answers... I always try to mix ideas from at least two different sources as often as I can for this reason. Never actually had a problem though, which is not surprising since my articles are hardly bestselling novels

[TheRichJerksNet]

Simple: Read, Rsearch, Learn, Write Your OWN....

James

[mmurtha]

Hi jullian,

I usually read an article if I want to use the subject matter or main idea within the content first. Then that is all I take from it - the main idea.

From that idea, I do my own research to make sure what I read is true. This way I can varify that information, and gather new info for what I am about to write.

So basically, I don't even rewrite what the original author wrote. I just take the main concept and create something completely new by adding fresh things to it.

For instance, if I am using an article that someone wrote with a title like -- "Ten tips to generating the best profit from a very small list" - I take the main idea out of that article that expresses the main concept within that title, rewrite my own title, and come up with either 10 new tips, or ways of expressing the 10 tips that they wrote about in a whole different light.

To me, even rewriting what someone originally wrote is copyright infringment whether they are rewrighting line by line, or as a whole.

This was always my problem with PLR articles - they never seemed to be different no matter how others rewrote them.

[Jillian Slack]

I agree.

For me, it's easier to do the research, read about the topic, sit down, and write fresh content.

Otherwise, you're struggling over each line. Plus there's the temptation to make your new content way too close to the source.

I mean, if you turned in a paper in college or high school that was merely each line rewritten, you'd likely be caught and receive a failing grade.

It's so much easier to digest everything and spit it back out in your own words.

Here's an example I'm pulling from junk mail that arrived today at my house selling vitamins and supplements.

With Blah Blah weight loss formulas, you're not buying false promises or knock-off products. You're getting the real deal, scientifically formulated, supported by our health advisor team. So what have you got to lose?

So now I'm sitting here, thinking, "How would I rewrite this, line by line?"

Let's see... how's this:

At Blah Blah, we don't sell knock-off products or false promises. Our weight loss formulas are authentic, formulated scientifically, and supported by our health advisor team because they are the real deal. How much weight have you got to lose?

Original? No.

Too close? Yes? No? Maybe?

I say, "Yes!"

Look at the duplications:

• false promises
• knock-off products
• the real deal
• supported by our health advisor team
• have you got to lose

OK, maybe that was a bad example.

To tell you the truth, it was DIFFICULT for me to sit here and try to rewrite each line. As you can see, I didn't get each line. I threw some info together from other lines.

My point is, I'm a professional writer and I'm paid for what I write every single day. Have been for several years. And I find it hard to do this line-by-line thing.

So why is it that people are so tempted to duplicate content?

Is it really that hard for them to write something new?

Are they simply not good at writing, but they don't want to (or can not yet afford to) outsource to have it done?

Or are they blissfully unaware of the fact that they might be doing the equivalent of taking clothing off of a rack and walking out of the store without paying?

[monopuff]

A lot of times when people offer a line by line rewrite it's just not practical.

I basically use an article someone wants rewritten as an outline for the main and supporting points, then go from there.

It's a skill just like anything else, the more you do it the better and faster you get.

A lot of people use it as a cheap alternative to buying unique articles.

[TMG Enterprises]

There is another reason that you didn't mention - many just don't care as long as it passes Copyscape.

Tina G

[Mollysbrother]

I tend to write my own articles after I have researched the topic that I plan to write about. This way, I get to control the arc of my article, get to control the style of my voice, pacing, etc.

But then again...sigh...I think sometimes I put way too much thought into my articles. I need to increase output without sacrificing the quality. I can't believe that some people can write 50 articles a day.

[Harry Behrens]

Originally Posted by Jillian Slack

To tell you the truth, it was DIFFICULT for me to sit here and try to rewrite each line. As you can see, I didn't get each line. I threw some info together from other lines.

My point is, I'm a professional writer and I'm paid for what I write every single day. Have been for several years. And I find it hard to do this line-by-line thing.

Haha, I know exactly what you mean... I tried the same several times and every time I was like 'screw it, just give me a blank notepad to type on'.

Originally Posted by Jillian Slack

So why is it that people are so tempted to duplicate content?

Is it really that hard for them to write something new?

I always hear that some people just aren't good at writing period. I don't know why, but I can't ever really believe it. I think for most people, it comes down to being so afraid of writing something awful or embarrassing that they just never let themselves try. It's just like with drawing... anybody can learn to draw, but people's fear of drawing badly keeps them from ever even thinking about it. Once you give yourself permission to mess up and realize that whatever happens you can deal with it, the ability opens up.

So line-by-line rewriting... it's... safe. That keeps you from needing to 'put yourself out there', in a way. It's someone else's work being viewed ultimately - not yours.

Of course they could just be really lazy, too

[Diana Lane]

I can't re-write PLR etc - line by line or at all. I've tried it, and I've just got too many thoughts of my own on most subjects. Halfway through the first sentence my mind will be off on a tangent and I end up with an article that bears no resemblence to the original and is all my own anyway.

Re-writing line by line sounds like hard work, not to mention dead boring - the sort of pointless thing teachers would give you to do at school that would have you certain you're practising a skill you're never going to need. The people that do line-by-line re-writes day in and day out must have a sight more stamina than I do. I wouldn't have thought people produced any more either by doing it this way instead of just doing their own thing. It must take ninety shades of forever.

Having said that, maybe I'd have more ability now if I'd actually bothered to do the pointless tasks we were given at school

[Jillian Slack]

Part of the fun is actually writing YOUR OWN content, not flipping each sentence around with the first two words at the beginning of the sentence now appearing in the last half of the sentence.

I was just thinking of it along the lines of possibly being sued.

Like I said, I'm not an attorney.

But in journalism school, I learned a lot about media ethics and media law, including the fact that you don't take a story out of one newspaper, rewrite it, and call it your own work.

And, with working on a master's degree in fiction writing, I've learned a lot about not "tweaking" the work of other writers in your genre and calling it your own.

The scary thing is anyone can sue you for anything they want. Even if you do your best to write your own content, there's always a possibility someone will say it was theirs to begin with. Sometimes they're after a cheap buck.

If you don't have the money to fight a legal battle, you're stuck giving in even if you KNOW your work is original and you toiled over every word.

[CDawson]

You can write "fresh content" articles all day but truth be told it is quite poissbly already out there in different words. There is nothing wrong with reading a piece of information and translating it into your own words. Nevertheless, this is how we get fresh content about a niche we know nothing about.

[Harry Behrens]

Originally Posted by Diana Lane

Halfway through the first sentence my mind will be off on a tangent and I end up with an article that bears no resemblence to the original and is all my own anyway.

See now that is the mark of a true writer.

Originally Posted by Jillian Slack

Part of the fun is actually writing YOUR OWN content, not flipping each sentence around with the first two words at the beginning of the sentence now appearing in the last half of the sentence.

So true.

Originally Posted by Jillian Slack

I was just thinking of it along the lines of possibly being sued.

Are you really worried about getting sued over an article though? I mean how many views would an article have to get before someone tries to sue you over it? I can see it happening with an ebook or a product maybe, if it gets *really* successful and you secretly copied it off of another guru or something... or maybe if we're talking about *thousands* of articles.

My reason for not copying/blatantly rewriting other people's stuff is my own - my own self-respect, my own ethic and my own compromise to my readers or clients. But if I hear about some rewriter out there on the internet who got sued for line-by-line rewriting of an article I would honestly be a bit shocked.

Of course I can totally see where you're coming from having done a Master's in Fiction - if I were a fiction writer I would probably see things a LOT differently. (I actually tried fiction once... to say it didn't work out would be a hilarious understatement.)

[TMG Enterprises]

this is how we get fresh content about a niche we know nothing about

Please don't use the word "we" in this context. A good many of us still believe in actually doing research, using several authoritative sources, to learn about the subject. Taking one article, reading it and regurgitating it is not the same thing at all.

Tina G

[JohnMcCabe]

Jillian, I'm not a lawyer, but I do consider myself an 'informed layman'. Taking an original work and rewriting it line by line is called creating a derivative work, and can be considered a copyright violation.

[adamv]

I'm not a lawyer but in my opinion, rewriting an article line by line is plagerism.

"Research" involves using more than one source and even if you did use only one source for a few facts and then wrote your own article, incorporating what you learned from the ONE that you read, that would be better than a simple line by line rewrite.

I think you should skim over a minimum of three sources and perhaps even take some notes and then write your own article without simply rewriting what someone else has written.

I don't know exactly what plagerism is according to the letter of the law and I'm sure there are some grey areas but I would not be comfortable using just one article as the source for mine and IMO simply rewriting line by line is just plain wrong.

[Jillian Slack]

Derivative work!

Thank you, John. That's the phrase I've had on the tip of my tongue but couldn't quite get it out.

[TheRichJerksNet]

Originally Posted by CDawson

You can write "fresh content" articles all day but truth be told it is quite poissbly already out there in different words. There is nothing wrong with reading a piece of information and translating it into your own words. Nevertheless, this is how we get fresh content about a niche we know nothing about.

I agree with Tina, don't use "we" in this context.. "YOU" may do this but it does not mean everybody does.

Fact is only articles I read are mine and those posted by my authors... I do not use articles for research...

If you know nothing about a certain niche then you should think about changing to something you do know about. I know many would disagree with that but sorry the fact is you would do a great deal better dealing with something you know about. If you want to learn more about a niche then do proper research so you can educate yourself good enough to be in that niche.

James

[mmurtha]

Originally Posted by Jillian Slack

I agree.

For me, it's easier to do the research, read about the topic, sit down, and write fresh content.

Otherwise, you're struggling over each line. Plus there's the temptation to make your new content way too close to the source.

I mean, if you turned in a paper in college or high school that was merely each line rewritten, you'd likely be caught and receive a failing grade.

It's so much easier to digest everything and spit it back out in your own words.

My point is, I'm a professional writer and I'm paid for what I write every single day. Have been for several years. And I find it hard to do this line-by-line thing.

So why is it that people are so tempted to duplicate content?

Is it really that hard for them to write something new?

Are they simply not good at writing, but they don't want to (or can not yet afford to) outsource to have it done?

Or are they blissfully unaware of the fact that they might be doing the equivalent of taking clothing off of a rack and walking out of the store without paying?

Jullin,

Yup, exactly!

To answer your other question, it's a combination of things.

I think Tina is right on the money with this comment here:

There is another reason that you didn't mention - many just don't care as long as it passes Copyscape.

Tina G

Plus you have to factor in lazy people, people who are in a hurry, have no money, etc ...

I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but many newer people bought products or read newsletters and forums, and were basically told it is a good way to do things, when in reality it isn't.

Btw I appreciate this discussion, and thanks for starting it!


Hey Harry,

Are you really worried about getting sued over an article though? I mean how many views would an article have to get before someone tries to sue you over it?

I would think that he would be worried. I know I am, and people on the Internet that use content should be too. It doesn't matter how many views the content gets, what matters is that the person used someone else's content, and claimed it as their own. That's the bottom line.

It seems there are a lot of people that write content are paying attention to the theft that's been going on for too long, and are looking to make an example out of someone.

I don't know if you were around when people started to sue others for using their images. That hit the market hard to be honest with you, and here again, some people didn't think it was a big deal until they got seeply fined for stealing something that didn't belong to them.

[Kay King]

I have an easy method for rewriting PLR - but I never rewrite someone else's article.

I'll take 3-5 PLR articles on the same topic, copy them all to one MS Word screen and do an auto-summarize at about 25-30%.

Then I open notepad and either quickly copy paste relevant sentences or (more likely) quickly retype the summary in my own words. I end up with a new article and get rid of the "wordy crap" that is often included in PLR.

I use this ONLY for PLR rewrites. If you are taking sentences or paragraphs from someone else's article, maybe you're just too lazy to write and should hire it done.

kay