Busting another site

I've been very careful about only using original content. We're spending the money to do so, and I've had my client cancel the crappy blog article service he was using (they offer only re-hashed crap articles). So we're definitely not infringing on anyone's copyrights. I've asked the client if they want me to give the competitor's name to the guy, so if they aren't uncomfortable with it, I'm inclined to nail them as well.

Here's the thing - that was just ONE of the publications they're stealing from. Do I contact them all or wait for them to pull them all once this newspaper calls them out on their copyright violations? The site is 14+ years old and has #1 SERP in Google for our main keyword. Now I'm curious where all of their blog stuff is coming from. I hate to play dirty, but if they're doing something illegal, I guess I shouldn't feel so bad.

The way I see it, it's like a kid who's been stealing lunch money from the other kids all year. Should you feel bad about telling the principal, since his revenue stream is going to dry up when he gets busted? No.

If there's a way to get all the pirated content removed from the other site without having action taken against them, you could aim for that if you're more comfortable that way. And in fact, if you notify the publishers they've been ripping off, that's probably what will happen. Litigation is expensive, so nobody's likely to sue them if they respond to demands to remove the infringing content.

This topic makes my skin crawl as well, but here's my take on your situation.

1. You're in business working with a client. You're in business to make money, correct? Don't lose focus on this.

2. Your client's competitor is breaking the law, not some "Google law", but the real copyright law.

3. Somehow it seems you're confusing "feeling badly" about telling the newspaper with some type of ethics violation on your part. The person with the ethics violation is the company that is STEALING content and using it, not you. They are not only unethical, they are breaking the law.

4. Your client is paying you for content, but really it's all about ranking and their business success. If your content doesn't generate the results they want (money), you won't have a client for long. Their success is your success, for this assignment, the next assignment, and using them for referrals.

5. Business is tough and its global. I once sat through a meeting in Asia for a multi-billion dollar company where they were deciding whether to license some code that probably was pirated/copied or license the original code from the creator. I was amazed that there was zero discussion of ethics, they just discussed the cost of licensing the original code versus the cost of licensing the suspicious code times the probability of getting sued times the expected legal/settlement costs.

The resulting costs: $10M for the original code versus $3M-$4M potential cost if they get sued. They decided to license the suspicious code (note - they eventually did get sued and ultimately settled for about $2.7M).

The morale of that story is in business you're probably not be competing with individuals who share your sense of value, so if what you need to do to compete successfully is legal(and truthful) - DO IT (or if it really bothers you for some reason, find another line of work).

In terms of your present situation, I would try this -
- Charge your client extra for doing this non-writing SEO related work on their behalf, after all, you're in business to make money right?
- Give all the information (site names, Google info, how to do a DMCA, etc) to the newspaper and let them and their attorneys do the dirty work, after all, its their site.
- Use this opportunity to build a relationship with people at the newspaper and try to get work from them (writing or SEO type of work), after all, you're in business to make money right?

Whew - lots of feedback - thank you! I think I've not been super clear about the progression of this situation.

My client noticed his competitor doing this reposting and since we've been trying desperately to get relevant content on the site, he wondered if we could do the same. I explained that I thought it would violate copyright and then wrote to the publisher. Granted, I played stupid, but my hope was that perhaps it was possible to gain licensing permission for a fee or something. I didn't give the company or even the business type of my client or their site.

Now that the publisher has told me it is not possible to reprint under any circumstances, he has asked me for the site's name. I have not responded and will not until my client makes a decision about how to proceed. In no way is my client mixed into this as far as all contact has been made through my personal gmail account.

I think you are right that I should just give the sites that are violating copyright to the two newspapers affected. I think less people understand how to find their material elsewhere online than you'd think. I know that I didn't know how, and this is a small publication in a small community. I think perhaps I shouldn't include any info about the DCMA and let them handle it on their own.

The only reason it makes me feel icky is that I don't like the concept of hurting anyone or their business. But as others have said, I'M not hurting them, their actions are. Will it kill their ranking, probably not. But it will eliminate an unfair advantage they have over my client.

Regarding me getting paid, I get paid the same whether I'm writing an article or doing SEO research and implementation. My client is pleased with the results we have seen so far, and I anticipate my continued efforts will bring further progress.

So, long story short, I didn't set out to wreck anyone's day, but I do think fair is fair and as a writer, I get irked when anyone's material is stolen.

And no, I don't use or condone the use of pirated material. I watch my vids on Hulu or Netflix and I buy my software (or use open source apps). Not making judgements, just making sure you don't make one about me.

I would suggest you to hand it over to the newspaper publisher. Your intention isn't to knock down your competitor, but to save the whole industry especially in preventing copywrite infringement. It might be abit bitter...