No, there's no "duplicate content penalty" per se. Google's John Mueller has repeatedly clarified that Google doesn't punish sites for having duplicate content unless it's deceptive or manipulative (like content scraping at scale to manipulate rankings). However, duplicate content DOES cause significant issues: (1) Ranking dilution—Google chooses one version to rank, possibly not your preferred version; (2) Link equity dilution—backlinks split across duplicates instead of consolidating; (3) Crawl budget waste—bots spend resources on duplicates; (4) Indexation problems—Google may not index all versions. While not a "penalty," the practical effect is similar: lower rankings and visibility.

301 Redirect: Server sends users and bots directly to the preferred URL. The duplicate URL no longer accessible. Passes 90-99% of link equity. Use when: duplicate shouldn't exist for users (HTTP to HTTPS, old URLs after migration, fixing www/non-www). Canonical Tag: Page remains accessible to users, but tells search engines "treat this as a duplicate of X." Link equity consolidated to canonical version. Use when: duplicate must exist for users (printer versions, product variations, URL parameters for sorting/filtering). Key difference: 301 is a command (redirect happens), canonical is a suggestion (Google usually respects it but can override). Never use both on same page—choose based on whether users need access to the duplicate.

There's no specific percentage threshold, but aim for pages to be substantially unique. General guidelines: (1) Over 50% of page content should be unique to that page; (2) Main content area should be 100% unique; (3) Boilerplate (headers, footers, sidebars) is acceptable and Google understands it; (4) Product descriptions should be at least 300 unique words. Red flags: Multiple pages with only slight variations (changing 1-2 sentences), pages where only title changes but body is identical, thin content padded with boilerplate. Best practice: Focus on creating substantial, valuable unique content rather than obsessing over exact percentages. If your pages provide genuine unique value to users, you're likely fine.

No! Each paginated page should have a self-referencing canonical (page 2 canonicals to itself, not to page 1). Canonicalizing all pages to page 1 is incorrect because: (1) Each page has unique content (different products/posts), (2) Users and search engines need to access all pages, (3) Products on page 5 would never rank if they canonical to page 1. Correct pagination handling: Self-referencing canonicals on each page, clear next/previous navigation, ensure pages beyond 1 are crawlable. Optional: Create "View All" page with ALL items and canonical paginated pages to it (only if view-all isn't too large). Deprecated but helpful: rel="next"/rel="prev" tags (Google no longer uses them, but they don't hurt).

If content is scraped/stolen: (1) Google usually recognizes the original (especially if you published first), (2) File DMCA takedown via Google: https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3110420, (3) Contact the site owner directly requesting removal, (4) If on major platform, report via their complaint process. If content is legitimately syndicated: (1) Ensure syndication partners include canonical link to your original, (2) Request proper attribution with link back to your site, (3) Consider asking partners to add unique introduction or use noindex, (4) Publish on your site first (24+ hours before syndication). Protection measures: Original publication date in structured data, clear authorship signals, build domain authority so Google trusts you as source, monitor with Copyscape alerts, register important content with copyright authorities.

Technically yes, but not recommended as hundreds of retailers likely use the same descriptions, creating massive duplication. Problems: Your product pages compete with everyone else using same description, Google may not rank any version highly due to lack of uniqueness, users get identical information on every site (no reason to buy from you). Better approaches: (1) Rewrite descriptions in your brand voice (best), (2) Keep manufacturer description but add substantial unique content (500+ words of reviews, comparisons, use cases), (3) Include unique elements (customer photos, videos, detailed specs, your expert analysis), (4) Use structured data to highlight unique attributes. Minimum effort: Add 200-300 words of unique commentary above/below manufacturer description explaining benefits, who product is for, why buy from you.

Large sites face bigger challenges: (1) More opportunities for duplication (URL parameters, faceted navigation, product variations), (2) Crawl budget concerns—duplication wastes limited resources, (3) Scale makes management harder, (4) Complex CMS systems generate duplicates automatically. Small sites face different issues: (1) Less tolerance for duplicate content (higher percentage of total pages), (2) Less domain authority to overcome duplication, (3) Every duplicate page is more impactful proportionally, (4) Harder to differentiate from competitors with same content. Impact comparison: 1,000 duplicate pages on 100,000-page site (1%) vs. 10 duplicate pages on 50-page site (20%)—small site proportionally worse off. Solution priority: Small sites: Focus on content uniqueness. Large sites: Focus on technical duplication (URL structure, parameters, crawl budget).

Yes, you should still use self-referencing canonical tags as best practice, even without obvious duplication. Reasons: (1) Prevents URL parameter issues (users might add parameters that create duplicates), (2) Protects against scrapers (if someone copies your content, canonical signals you're the original), (3) Protocol variations (page might be accessible via HTTP even if you only link HTTPS), (4) Removes ambiguity for search engines, (5) Future-proofing (easier to manage if you later add mobile versions, AMP, etc.). Implementation: Include self-referencing canonical on every indexable page pointing to itself with absolute URL. This is considered SEO best practice and recommended by Google. Cost: minimal (one line of code). Benefit: prevents numerous potential issues.

Timeline varies: (1) Discovery: 1-7 days after Google crawls page with canonical tag, (2) Processing: 2-6 weeks for Google to fully consolidate signals, (3) Indexation changes: 1-3 months to see full impact on rankings. Factors affecting speed: Popular pages discovered faster, sites with higher crawl rate process faster, conflicting signals delay processing (e.g., canonical to A but links point to B), correct implementation matters (errors cause delays). How to check: Google Search Console → Index → Pages shows canonical status (wait 1-2 weeks after implementation), search site:yourdomain.com to see which URLs Google indexes, URL Inspection Tool shows Google-selected canonical. Be patient: Full transition can take 2-3 months for large sites. Monitor GSC for errors indicating canonical issues.

Yes, but differently than body content duplication. Duplicate meta descriptions: Not a ranking factor, but reduces click-through rates (CTR) in search results. Users see identical descriptions for multiple pages and can't differentiate. Google may generate own descriptions if yours aren't unique. Fix by writing unique, compelling descriptions for each page. Duplicate title tags: More serious—Google may struggle to determine which page is relevant for queries. Impacts rankings indirectly through user confusion and click behavior. Each page needs unique, descriptive title. Detection: Google Search Console → Index → Pages shows duplicate meta issues. Screaming Frog highlights duplicates. Priority: Lower than body content duplication, but still worth fixing. Good titles/descriptions improve CTR even with same ranking position.