Doesn't make sense. A single post gets DMCA'd because of a copyrighted video, but the other posts which have copyrighted videos (haven't yet been dmca'd, from the same author, mind you) are still getting ranked and clicked daily.domain and keyword, if you use completely different domain then it may work
I shared my experienceDoesn't make sense. A single post gets DMCA'd because of a copyrighted video, but the other posts which have copyrighted videos (haven't yet been dmca'd, from the same author, mind you) are still getting ranked and clicked daily.
I have a question.It is understood that 301 redirect passes link juice as well any penalties that the original post may have.
So in this case, the DMCA penalty should pass on to the new URL too or the page might get identified as a copy of the original page. In any case this is not an ideal practice IMO.
Changing the URL of a copyrighted content page and redirecting the old URL to the new one will not circumvent copyright issues. Search engines like Google use various methods to detect copyrighted material beyond just the URL, including the content itself and metadata. Attempting to evade copyright enforcement through URL manipulation is not a viable solution, as search engines are designed to recognize such tactics and may still deindex or penalize the content.
From what I've gathered yes, 301 domains with bad history is bad for SEO. I have no concrete proof of this, just hearsay which is a form of proof I guess...I have a question.
If so, can it be used as a negative SEO pointing to other websites?
Or does the DMCA link flow only get passed on within the same domain?
Similar to 301.
If you 301 domains with penalties to other domains, will the penalty flow to the new site?
We know the good metrics get passed, what about the bad metrics?
I'm not an expert on 301 but I guess only the good parts will get passed via 301 and the bad parts are simply ignored.