Welcome to the Q&A Forum

We had offers from a quite a few well reputed News sources to syndicate our content but we declined those for exactly this reason. These media sites are usually of very high authority and there is nothing much you can do about as of now to prove that you are the original source of the content as Google unfortunately still allows higher authority sites to outrank the original provider. I believe Google Authorship will reduce this issue to a good extent but right now if you don't want them to outrank you, just don't let them syndicate.

Yes, but technically (and according to Google's docs) when you robots something out, you are saying "This URL shouldn't be indexed." And if the special page a)lives at the HP URL, or b) is redirected from the HP via 302, you are telling them "please don't index my homepage." The docs say "when we see noindex, we pull the page." My question really is whether the 307 is any better than the 302. I think I implied above that I saw no difference but with the "only cacheable if" language It looks like it's supposed to be. THEN AGAIN, that same language is in the HTTP1.1 definition of the 302 as well as a 307. Bbut I'm hoping someone has an example of using one successfully (where success = the temporary content did not get cached in SERPs). Thanks!