Recently while checking the traffic stats for our site, I came across an article that was originally written by one of our staff. As authors, when we publish content to the internet, we know that it can often be re-used. As such, we only ask that any site that does reuse our material to maintain the material as it was written.

The site I found unfortunately did not retain the article in its original form, but instead used what appeared to be a randomized thesaurus tool to change words around. Trying to read through the article made it quite incoherent, unintelligible, and quite useless as an article about dog health issues.

We find it quite shameful to think that someone out there is blatantly butchering our material for the purpose of avoiding a "possible" duplicate content filter.

If the site owner had simply sent us an E-mail, asking politely for an original, but altered version, then we would have been more then willing to adjust it to bypass any duplicate content issues. Heck, if they had modified it manually and kept the actual context of the article, I might even let it slide.

However, we are going to attempt to have it pulled. Who knows what will happen.

As I do not want to specify the site name, I have copied their version, along with the original article content here.

The bad copy page 2: Original on page 3