“Cloning” Content is a Bad Practice

blue25

“Cloning” Content is a Bad Practice

Okay. So I’m not that all that keen on Andrew Keen’s book, The Cult of the Amateur: How Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture.

But there’s one thing that Keen and I can agree on. We both hate it when we’ve discovered that publishers have obviously cut-and-pasted content from one site to another without at least citing where it came from—especially when it’s our content.

It’s frustrating when you go searching for a piece of information and you find the same info, written in exactly the same way, on a hundred different sites. It is a bad experience that just doesn’t help.

In fact, we’re so uptight about it here at Yahoo! Publisher Network that one sure fire way to get kicked out is to “clone” someone else’s content. It’s not just cut-and-paste that gets us riled. Some folks think it’s okay to load up their sites with little games, time wasters and other digital bling that they’ve either copied illegally, or have bought from someone else. Either way, it’s just not cricket, at least not in this network.

Call it a network quality thing
Yahoo! Publisher Network is working toward being the highest quality ad network that we can be. We’ve got our standards, just like any young debutante. We want to give users a high quality experience, something more-or-less original that is both useful and entertaining.

True, some sites need more content than others—backgrounders, critical articles, product reviews, definitions, blog entries, essays, Flickr photos and so forth. But there’s a quality way to fill that need and avoid cloning. At Creative Commons you can search and find content under flexible copyright that you can use as long as you abide by the site’s terms and conditions and the author’s restrictions.

—Michael Mattis, Clone Ranger


:  大家注意了 嘿嘿

healfish

嗬嗬，大家看看就可以了，不要太激动了