Fair Use vs. PLR
By now, most folks know what “fair use doctrine” is (Section 107 in U.S. federal copyright law), but some crazy wacked-out online marketers want you to buy their private label rights (PRL) articles or they want to offer you an article creator that uses either PRL articles for their content source or legitimate non-PRL articles for their content source citing that you can take and steal any exact match sentence from any author under fair use doctrine.
WRONG! Don’t believe them. Fair Use doctrine allows you to CITE a small section of someone’s works. If you take someone elses works (such as a single complex sentence from 30 different authors against their consent) WITHOUT giving them CREDIT for their works or obtaining permission if your use of their content exceeds a certain amount when compared to their entire copyrighted works and if you intend to do this for commercial gain, you are sliding down a slippery slope that leads to failure, not to mention potential legal problems. At a minimum, it’s unethical.
Don’t do it: If you’re just stealing exact match sentences and re-assembling a new article that you will call your own, know that you are not going to fool us (yes, we can detect even one exact complex sentence match against our entire database in real-time) and you certainly are not going to fool the patented search engines. You are wasting your time.
Better suggestion: Steer clear of private label rights articles, steer clear of article creators that provide the content for you so that you can mix and mash up someone else’s stolen works, and USE your creative mind to produce your own content. You can do it. :) Be Unique.
You say to stay away from PLR articles, and others are saying to stay away from article directory articles (such as your own). If the second statement is true, your success rides on people using your articles for their websites which some claim will kill your website rankings on the search engines. What is your position on using article directory articles for website content?
[Reply]