Google should get better at cataloging pinterest and stock photos in images, both break the normal rules for websites displaying in traditional search.
A recent googler ama pointed out increased improvements in google images, i hope that includes crushing this nonsense.
How is this legal?
If these sites are offering paid registration, or are including advertising, they may be committing a criminal offence in some regions.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/internet-rages-after...
This doesn't always help you get to the bottom of things, but it is a next step to take.
I'd want to assume that their systems are more advanced than that (or if they're really in cahoots, maybe Google crawls them with a unique, secret bot UA to prevent this sort of thing), but I just got done with another thread where an ex-Tumblr dev said all user content was in a single S3 bucket without MFA delete so my gut feeling is lending a bit more weight to the "everything is held together with rubber bands and duct tape and it's only a matter of time before the jig is up" parameter than the "large, powerful companies tend to hire smart people that communicate and design robust systems effectively" one.
That's perhaps the kind of thing google would find quite useful.
It’s less about plagiarism, more about a dead end vs. a stepping stone.
All things being equal, Pinterest should have been penalised into non-existence by now?
Edit: weird, it just adds "-site:pinterest.*" to all of your google searches. Even non-image searches. That's a very heavy handed approach. Uninstalling.