BE Warned - Forget About Trying PLR on Kindle (KDP)

Amen to that. I hope Amazon continues to be vigilant in their war against PLR garbage.

Thanks for writing this. I bought a few PLR things a while ago and found them universally crappy. I was looking for a free report to build a mailing list and extensively edited what seemed to be the best of a sorry lot.

After a while, I wrote something of my own for a much shorter free report and wondered if the longish PLR book would work for me on Kindle. I personally checked all the statistics (which turned out all to obsolete at best, totally wrong at worst), junked a bunch of the original content, found some all new material, and rearranged everything to more closely resemble the structure of my new free report. Oh, and I added references at the end of each chapter so readers could follow up and, in a few years, find current statistics. It's 125 Ways to Go Green and Save Green at the Same Time

By the time I was finished, I had legitimately written the book, although I'm grateful to have a PLR took to use for a point of departure. In the process of publishing it to Kindle, I found what for all the world looks like the original PLR book, complete with the original cover.

Just because you bought the right to put your name on someone else's work and sell it does not mean it's worth trying to use Amazon's marketing muscle instead of your own!

Personally, I'm glad Amazon is not allowing people to sell repackaged PLR as Kindle books. It's a good reminder for those Internet marketers who prefer to be lazy and take every possible shortcut just to make a fast buck.

I understand the argument that someone took the time to research and compile information (obtained from other sources) so it's all in a nice package for the benefit of the reader. However, to sell it as your own work (not aiming this at the OP) still isn't okay, and I think that's the issue here.

There's a lot of opportunity with Kindle, but what you sell there should be unique; not rewritten or repackaged public domain stuff or PLR. But doing so takes a lot of time and effort (or money to hire someone else to write it for you). And many people don't want to make that kind of investment.

Kindle has been yet another money-making venue quickly exploited by Internet marketers. Kudos to Amazon for setting some clear boundaries to help prevent such exploitation.

My thoughts also.

If it were an extensive rewrite it should be completely unidentifiable in contrast.

How exactly does do some ebook titles look PLRish ???

What criteria detects a PLR ebook . . .

I am really happy that amazon is making the quality better for all of us. The way I look at it is that they are forcing me to be more creative with my work to produce a better product. Fantastic.

Thanks for sharing. It makes sense, I can see how publishers and distributors of content do not want a marketplace full of like or very similar content but there are challenges for authors.

One of the biggest challenges I believe authors and content originators face is that even by creating and publishing unique content you can be flagged. For example Squidoo's new system is so strict that I have heard cases where original content is locked and deleted. With so much content online it is likely, especially with fewer words, that somewhere out there in vast cyberspace someone in the world has written and is sharing content similar.

The biggest frustration is once your content is flagged, locked, or deleted the appeal process is horrid because the presumption is people are guilty until proven innocent and companies have so much content constantly coming in that hiring staff for an appeal process for content they don't need is a direct expense in the gutter. In Squidoo's case search in Google and you will find countless people complaining about their appeals not even receiving replies.
Sometimes depending on earnings generated by content an account termination or content deletion can lead to financial loss for the author. In the real world if someone gets fired they have an appeal process that is formalized until a result (done with due diligence) and the employer must pay wages for earnings to date. Justice is sometimes blind but in the court system people are innocent until proven guilty.

Content originators and authors will experience the growing pains of these rules and regulations enforced by each company. My advice is to make sure your content is completely unique and contains more words than less and if possible unique images, etc.

Having said that I believe in generally there is nothing wrong with PLR content and people sharing content. PLR, resell rights, and licensing is nothing new. If people license content and choose to make money from adding to, modifying or using as is the content then its a business and they should be able to do so. It's not a new concept and has been happening in life long before the Internet.

* Should publishing sites have a better process for managing content and rights?

* Should sites take extreme measures or allow PLR / licensed content but with penalty or a special listing?

* Should there be an appeal processes with due diligence that companies must invest in and follow (should it be regulated by the Government or an independent body)? Do people at least deserve a reply and reason if banned, terminated, locked, or blocked?

* If an account is terminated should payout be made to the account holder of funds that have accumulated to date (should this be Governed under employment law)?

* Should people that report content be reviewed themselves (sometimes affiliate marketers that purchase the same content (PLR packages, etc. ) report content without cause to get their competitors content deleted so that theirs remains and gets all the traffic -- example is YouTube)

There are many more questions, but just my 2 cents. This topic is much bigger and is a real social and human rights issue.

I contacted Amazon a month ago about a plr package and what was their position about it.

I wrote it, only sold 10 copies. I posted the material after giving some time to the first sellers to take action and, essentially, the material shows as mine on the web.

The problem with plr is that it does not transfer the copyright. This is the main thing Amazon does not like about it, besides the repeated content.

As the seller of the package I still hold those rights, but it is a grey area because the people who bought it do have the right to make derivative works of it changing almost nothing but the author.

After talking it over with them, I decided not to give it a shot. They did not like it.

I really do not imagine that a search engine is the simple answer to PLR detection.

There are so many ways to edit and revise a PLR product, and on top of that it can be spun and rewrote many ways.

I fully understand how Kindle desire fresh, original output and not rehashed junk but I can't believe they depend on search engines or Google, or whatever.

They only need corporate access to Google's API.

They can grab a sentence or a dozen sentences from any content submitted to them in the form of a Kindle book, and check that sentence against Google to see whether the information is available elsewhere online for free.

When I check content for duplication, I grab the end of one sentence and the beginning of the next sentence, put both in quotes and run them through Google.

It is a very simple and effective method of finding content that is already currently available online for free.

I have fired many a ghost writer on account of this.