Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Footer copyright year statement. good or bad
-
Hi,
I see a lot of sites with a year copyright statment in the footer like
Copyright 2011 - DomainName.com
or
Copyright 2002 - 2012 - Domainname.com
since new year a lot of sites (founded before 2011) still have 2011 instead of 2012 in the footer. Do you think the date gives any signals to google?
Should someone update the date or remove it completely?
I would tend to remove it completely since the page date for google is submitted in the HTTP header. But maybe the info could be of any use for the user. Any best practices?
-
I agree with Bryce that it probably doesn't affect Google's perception of the page at all.
However, from a user standpoint an "outdated" copyright could work against you. I see it as a sort of trust signal. I was on a page earlier that said "Copyright 2001" and I just couldn't get over it. If they can't bother to update the date on their site, why would they bother with having me as a customer?
Just something to think about. Great question.
-
Copyright notices are really just a signal for the users, and to say "don't steal our stuff" in somewhat of a non-forceful way. People can generate the year automatically, but sometimes they just forget to include it.
Is it a big deal to have an older date? Probably not. Google has a number of other ways they could check a page's freshness aside from a completely arbitrary copyright date.
An interesting note about copyright, you don't really have to display a copyright notice in the first place. As soon as you create something, it's already considered "copyrighted."
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
City and state link stuffing in footer
A competitor has links to every state in the U.S., every county in our state and nearby states, and every city in those nearby states. All with corresponding link text and titles that lead to pages with thin, duplicate content. They consistently rank high in the SERPS and have for years. What gives--I mean, isn't this something that should get you penalized?
On-Page Optimization | | nkolson0 -
Tags - Good or bad for SEO
We are getting Moz errors for duplicate content because tag pages share the same blog posts. Is there any way to fix this? Are these errors bad for SEO, or can I simply disregard these and ignore them? We are also getting Moz errors for missing descriptions on tag pages. I am unsure how to fix these errors, as we do not actually have pages for these on our WordPress site where we are able to put in a description. I have heard that having tags can be good for SEO? (We don't mind having several links that show up when searching for us on google...) As far as the SEO goes, I am not sure what to do. Does anyone know the best strategy?
On-Page Optimization | | Christinaa0 -
Handling multiple locations in the footer
I have a client with several locations. Should I include only the main office's address in the footer? The client is wanting to add them all.
On-Page Optimization | | SearchParty0 -
Using H3-4 tags in the footer or sidebars: good or not?
Howdy SEOmoz fans! Is it considered a good / bad / neutral practice to include H tags in the footer, as a mean to group a few links? Take http://www.seomoz.org/ for instance: - Voted Best SEO Tool 2010! = H2
On-Page Optimization | | AxialDev
- Looking for SEO consulting? = H3
- Product and Tools = H3 Company = H3 etc. I often see the same principle applied to sidebars. I feel like because they don't contribute to the actual content structure and because they are repeated from page to page, we should avoid them, but I have nothing to back my intuition. [+] Perhaps they are helpful for usability (screen readers) and thin added value (i.e. category names that carry more weight than if they weren't headers). What do you think? Thanks for your time.1 -
Is a Z almost as good as an S?
Possibly seems a strange question, but let me clarify... I have a new site in mind and all the domain names I was considering for it have been taken (I want a .com or a .net if at all possible). However, I can get the domain with a z at the end rather than an s Example: www.keyword-guides.com is taken, but www.keyword-guidez.com is available. Am I completely wrong in thinking that it will still match well for anyone searching Keyword Guide, and should match fairly well (even though it is a partial match) for people searching Keyword Guides. As the keyword is the most relevant bit of the domain, and as the first word on the domain is given the most weight, will having Z instead of S at the end make any difference at all? Personally, I don't really like the Z option, but if it would have no (or little) impact on my SEO efforts, I could live with it.
On-Page Optimization | | Jingo010 -
Is giving away something for a Google Review bad?
I have a friend whose client is giving away something for free if you leave a Google Review for his site. I recall that being not well liked by Google and could potentially end up in a Penalty. The site is ranking really poorly in Google but well in Yahoo/Bing so I am wondering if that is what happened. What are you opinions?
On-Page Optimization | | netviper0 -
Tag clouds: good for internal linking and increase of keyword relevant pages?
As Matt Cutts explained, tag clouds are OK if you're not engaged in keyword stuffing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYPX_ZmhLqg) - i.e. if you're not putting in 500 tags. I'm currently creating tags for an online-bookseller; just like Amazon this e-commerce-site has potentially a couple of million books. Tag clouds will be added to each book detail page in order to enrich each of these pages with relevant keywords both for search engines and users (get a quick overview over the main topics of the book; navigate the site and find other books associated with each tag). Each of these book-specific tag clouds will hold up to 50 tags max, typically rather in the range of up to 10-20. From an SEO perspective, my question is twofold: 1. Does the site benefit from these tag clouds by improving the internal linking structure? 2. Does the site benefit from creating lots of additional tag-specific-pages (up to 200k different tags) or can these pages become a problem, as they don't contain a lot of rich content as such but rather lists of books associated with each tag? Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | semantopic0 -
Would it be bad to change the canonical URL to the most recent page that has duplicate content, or should we just 301 redirect to the new page?
Is it bad to change the canonical URL in the tag, meaning does it lose it's stats? If we add a new page that may have duplicate content, but we want that page to be indexed over the older pages, should we just change the canonical page or redirect from the original canonical page? Thanks so much! -Amy
On-Page Optimization | | MeghanPrudencio0
