Hi from ContentBoss

Hi there - anyone has any questions related to generating unique content using content wrangling, just ask.

Regards
ContentBoss

[Join us @ facebook]

Hi,

are you a copywriter? How can I see your work/rates?

Hi, we supply contentboss - the leading content wrangler available today. You can use it to make any content unique, including content for blogs, article directories etc. Here are a couple of example blogs generated with contentboss.

http://mesothelioma.contentboss.com

http://creditcards.contentboss.com

Content wrangling? Is that a new way of saying that you take content from several existing sources and simply rewrite it?

Well.. there's not much that's "simple" about it.

If the sites you listed are examples of the work of a content rewriting program, I must admit it does a much better job than anything else I've seen. If it was done by a person, you have not done enough to hide the original sources in at least one of the articles I looked at.

However, rewriting someone else's content without their permission is simply copyright infringement whether it is done by humans or a computer program.

If the sites you listed are examples of the work of a content rewriting program, I must admit it does a much better job than anything else I've seen. If it was done by a person, you have not done enough to hide the original sources in at least one of the articles I looked at.

However, rewriting someone else's content without their permission is simply copyright infringement whether it is done by humans or a computer program.

The objective isn't to 'hide the sources', it's to create something search engines regard as unique whci si still readable, and won't trigger the statistical chain filtering most search engines use in tehir shingling nowadays. Which it does.

And copyright infringement is a fairly specific offense in most countries. Taking someone else's work and creating something new and different from it isn't "copyright infringement". If it isn't wrangled enough, you could possibly refer to it as plagiarism. But that isn't even a legal word, let alone an offense.

Sorry to disagree, but you sound like someone who makes a living selling articles. Presumably you create your works in a complete vacuum, without reference to anything that has ever been written or spoken by another person before. Otherwise you are 'guilty of copyright infringement'.

Contentboss is a TOOL for writers - it makes the creation of unique content easier, just like a word processor. Or maybe you'd prefer us all to go back to pencil and paper.

Er - chalk and slate.

Er.. papyrus and charcoal...

[Join us @ facebook]

I would really want to see if such tools can eliminate the duplicate content problems in search engines.

You can insult me all you like. I simply took a sentence at random and searched for it in Google. It was already on several other websites; including what appeared to be your primary source.

Plagiarism is mainly an academic term and not relevant here. Copyrights extend to derivative works which is what you are creating with your tool.

There is a big difference between taking facts from another article as source material and lifting entire sentences from that article. While both have been done as long as humans have created written works, only one is considered acceptable use.

Whether you call it article spinning or content wrangling it still leaves your customers at risk of receiving a DCMA notice or lawsuit.

[Join us @ facebook]

I see, so even if it works it is a black hat method...

By definition this technique is creating derivative works. Derivative works are protected.

I don't know if I would call it "black hat" in the traditional sense Nikolas. Article spinning software is something that is often hotly debated in the writing forums; both for derivative/copyright issues as well as the often low-quality of their output. The samples from this product do appear to be quite good, assuming that they have not been cleaned up by hand - the sentences make sense and are fairly well-constructed unlike other spun content that I've seen.

Article spinners as a rule take one or more articles and attempt to shuffle them something like a deck of cards to create something that would be "new". At the low end, these programs simply replace adjectives. More sophisticated programs will flip the sentence structure - "I went to the store." becomes "To the store I went." The holy grail of article spinning is to be able to take several articles, mix up the sentences, switch adjectives and flip around sentence structure and be able to spit out something that will be untraceable and still retain readability.

If the original articles being spun are owned by the person using the software, there should not be any issues - after all, you already own the copyrights to the originals. Software programs like this one could be useful in that case for creating multiple versions of the same article.

Where it gets tricky is when the original articles being used are "borrowed" from other websites or are PLR pieces. The trouble with anything being sold or traded as PLR is that they are not always truly a private label rights article. Some authors do place limitations on the use of their PLR pieces and other pieces being called PLR are in fact themselves stolen.

A large part of the risk of using this or any other program is where the source material comes from. I seem to recall someone offering article spinner software that searched for a term in Google and then used the articles it found as source material. I think there was another one that did something similar by using articles from one or more of the popular article directories. Both of these techniques would involve creating derivative works that infringe on the original author's copyrights.

Like ContentBoss said, this is a tool for webmasters who need multiple articles on the same topic. My intention of commenting was to insure that you and anyone else considering using this or any similar product understands what liabilities they may cause for the user.

As a writer, you can imagine I dislike them on principle - it would be like someone taking one of your client's web designs, changing the colors around a bit and shifting some things around and calling it their own. I  realize that as long as the search engines essentially demand fresh content that there will be folks who seek shortcuts. The problem with shortcuts is that they often create new problems for those who take them.

[Guest]

[62.886]

Googlebot, Yahoo crawler