Experts Exchange versus AllFAQ.org
Experts Exchange has been hit by a screen-scraping site called allfaq.org and have stolen a good chunk of content. The interesting thing is they are out-ranking EE with Google in various ways and we're wondering why. Some factors we've speculated include:
- .org versus .com classification
- free versus paid
- supporting google ads
- lower page weight (skimpy markup, no images)
Any ideas on what type of analysis/comparative we should run? Much appreciated.
- .org versus .com classification
- free versus paid
- supporting google ads
- lower page weight (skimpy markup, no images)
Any ideas on what type of analysis/comparative we should run? Much appreciated.
aikimark
Shouldn't this question be in the ZA zone?
ASKER
Nope, I'm asking the community as a whole.
What about the legal angle? Anything to be done there?
They even reference EE in some of the solutions:
http://w.e-e.com/i9Lj9G
vs
http://www.experts-exchang
They even reference EE in some of the solutions:
http://w.e-e.com/i9Lj9G
vs
http://www.experts-exchang
URL Shortened to prevent SEO for the 'other' site.
Alan Hardisty
ZA
ASKER
We're exploring it from a legal perspective, but this particular question is meant to focus on why/how they could outrank us at all?
@bobexpert
You are asking "the world" this question, including a.l.l.f.a.q. [dot] o.r.g.
You are asking "the world" this question, including a.l.l.f.a.q. [dot] o.r.g.
Okay - leaving it to those that know SEO (which is not me) ; )
ASKER
Correct. aikimark. I think we'll survive.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
From a legal perspective (I am not a lawyer) my understanding is that users of EE license EE to use their content, but EE doesn't hold copyright in the content.
As they are only grabbing small pieces of EE's collection of licensed copyright works owned by EE contributors, I doubt you are in a position to file a DMCA for anything other than content written my EE staff.
However I did notice the site is doing automated translation of content which is now against Google ToS for their translate API, and allowing automated translation of content is now against their webmaster guidelines.
The site in general is a poor user experience only having partial answers. Which makes it a MFA site that might be looked on as against Google's Adsense policy.
It wouldn't be unusual for copyright owners such as EE authors reporting such a site as a violation of Google's adsense policies by clicking on the logo of an advert on a page displaying their work, and reporting it as a violation of the Adsense policy.
Authors so inclined could also file a DMCA if they thought their copyright was being breached.
As they are only grabbing small pieces of EE's collection of licensed copyright works owned by EE contributors, I doubt you are in a position to file a DMCA for anything other than content written my EE staff.
However I did notice the site is doing automated translation of content which is now against Google ToS for their translate API, and allowing automated translation of content is now against their webmaster guidelines.
The site in general is a poor user experience only having partial answers. Which makes it a MFA site that might be looked on as against Google's Adsense policy.
It wouldn't be unusual for copyright owners such as EE authors reporting such a site as a violation of Google's adsense policies by clicking on the logo of an advert on a page displaying their work, and reporting it as a violation of the Adsense policy.
Authors so inclined could also file a DMCA if they thought their copyright was being breached.
Note: I believe they might have some problems with monetization soon ;)
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I really appreciate the insight, duz.
One quick follow-up question - can you provide specific examples of how our scraping friends have a better internal linking structure? Articulating would probably help our SEO/engineering staff the most.
Thanks again.
One quick follow-up question - can you provide specific examples of how our scraping friends have a better internal linking structure? Articulating would probably help our SEO/engineering staff the most.
Thanks again.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
That was very helpful. Ok, so last question (swear) from our SEO folks:
Which sites (outside of our screen-scraping friends) would you consider to be using internal linking best practices?
Thanks again, duz.
Which sites (outside of our screen-scraping friends) would you consider to be using internal linking best practices?
Thanks again, duz.
I haven't got time to respond in detail, I did respond to one question by an EE engineer by email.
I don't fully agree with Duz
My email reply concentrated on flattening site architecture whilst highlighting terms which bring highest conversions.
It is quite possible header terms from top level navigation don't bring in high conversions, thus optimizing anchor text on them won't necessarily be of much consequence to a page 5+ levels down.
I don't fully agree with Duz
My email reply concentrated on flattening site architecture whilst highlighting terms which bring highest conversions.
It is quite possible header terms from top level navigation don't bring in high conversions, thus optimizing anchor text on them won't necessarily be of much consequence to a page 5+ levels down.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Impressive as always, guys.
Thought this might be helpful:
http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo-should-know-45288
http://searchengineland.com/key-information-architecture-concepts-every-seo-should-know-45288