decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 02:59 PM EDT

Groklaw has been selected by the Library of Congress for inclusion in its web archival project, in the category of Legal Blawgs. I feel incredibly honored and validated by this invitation. We have created a collection of materials that has recognized value to researchers and historians.

We have to give permission, though, and Groklaw isn't just me. It's you and me, so I thought I'd ask you how you feel about it. We have several choices. I can have them archive just the articles, or, if you grant permission, the articles with your comments. And we can decide who can access the collection, the public at large or just the Congress and on-site researchers and historians.

You can say no to everything related to your comments, absolutely, but this is offering to make us part of what researchers and historians will have access to, so they can tell the history of this time period with accuracy. And my personal feeling is that your comments are part of this history.

I know in general, the last time we discussed it, the majority by far did not wish comments included in Google or other search engines. So that is a factor to consider. On the other side, your comments are very much part of the Groklaw research project, and it's not fully Groklaw without them. If you remember our Bilski coverage, which we worked on with future historians very much in mind, your comments were vital and in one case, a comment led to an article that I consider one of the most important contributions to the discussion about software patents that Groklaw ever published, An Explanation of Computation Theory for Lawyers. I could not have written that article, and it's just one example of you contributing the technical knowledge that makes Groklaw complete.

As another example, when it comes to our coverage of hearings and trials, I couldn't really cover them at all until much later, based only on transcripts, without you. It would be a loss not to include the comments, because in some cases questions were asked and answered in the comments, and your contributions there will certainly be of real interest to historians, not just because of the coverage itself, but also as an early example of this new kind of journalism Groklaw represents.

Let me show you the email from the Library of Congress, so you can give this your consideration:

The United States Library of Congress has selected your Web site for inclusion in its historic collections of Internet materials related to Legal Blawgs. The Library's traditional functions, acquiring, cataloging, preserving and serving collection materials of historical importance to the Congress and to the American people to foster education and scholarship, extend to digital materials, including Web sites. We request your permission to collect your Web site and add it to the Library's research collections. We also ask that we be allowed to display the archived version(s) of your Web site.

The following URL has been selected:

www.groklaw.net

With your permission, the Library of Congress or its agent will engage in the collection of content from your Web site at regular intervals over time. The Library will make this collection available to researchers onsite at Library facilities. The Library also wishes to make the collection available to offsite researchers by hosting the collection on the Library's public access Web site. The Library hopes that you share its vision of preserving Internet materials and permitting researchers from across the world to access them. If you agree to permit the Library to collect your Web site, please click the following link to signify your consent. This link also includes a separate consent for permitting the Library to provide offsite access to your materials through the Library's Web site.

[PJ: Link redacted.]

For several years, the Library of Congress has collected Web sites within certain themes or topics for which we were required to seek permission for each new collection developed by the Library, even if permission had been granted in the past. As our collections have grown, we have had to contact some Web site producers repeatedly. To reduce this duplication and to save site owners from having to respond to multiple requests for information, we are now requesting permissions for the Library to collect, over time and in varying frequency, sites of research interest. Your site has been identified as a Web site of interest related to Legal Blawgs. If you grant this permission, we will capture your site for inclusion in our Legal Blawgs Web Archive and may also include it in any future collections. If in the future you no longer wish to be included in the Library's Web archives, please contact us and we will cease collection of your URL.

Our Web archives related to government and law are important because they contribute to the historical record of national events, capturing information that could otherwise be lost. With the growing role of the Web as an influential medium, records of historic events could be considered incomplete without materials that were born digital and never printed on paper.

For more information about our Web Archive collections please visit our Web site at (http://www.loc.gov/webarchiving/).

As you can see, we have choices, and if down the road we don't wish to continue, we can even opt out. My guess is that they wish to preserve the history of the SCO litigations, for one thing, and I very much love that idea. It's exactly what we have been trying to do, create a complete historical record of these important events we are living through.

So, not to pressure you in any way, in that I can give permission just for my work without any issues, but how do you feel? I will abide by your choice on your own contributions. And if you worry at all that you'd be reluctant to contribute in the future if you know it might end up archived for all time, so to speak, I understand that. I feel it a bit myself. So I really mean it when I say you can choose whatever feels right to you. We have miles to go before we sleep, to paraphrase Robert Frost, and the SCO coverage will be ongoing for quite a while, so if you break out in hives at the idea of being preserved in the Library of Congress, it would be better to pass at least until the SCO saga is at an end.

One possible middle road would be to allow the comments only in the collection available only to Congress, but not to the offsite public. Here are the two choices:

Acceptance to archive Web site

"I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to archive the Web site identified above for inclusion in the Library's collection of Web materials."

Acceptance to provide offsite access

"I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the Library's public Web site."

After you think it over, I'll abide by the majority feeling, unless one of you brainiacs thinks of something that makes this a bad idea, period, because of some factor I have not thought of myself.

  


Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections? | 1081 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: jimbudler on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:03 PM EDT
Yes. Let them have everything!

---
Jim Budler

[ Reply to This | # ]

Put it all in there
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:03 PM EDT
It's all part of the "Groklaw" experience. Dump everything in,
including the kitchen sink.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Minor player
Authored by: archanoid on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:07 PM EDT
I'm just a bit player and just lurk most of the time. But I don't care what they
do with my comments. Make them publicly available for the rest of time if you
want. OK by me.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: DBLR on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:07 PM EDT
I say let them have everything including all reply's.

---

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is
a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Cool
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:07 PM EDT
I may need to create an account now so that my name will be in the library of
congress archives.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Cool - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:49 PM EDT
  • Cool - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:17 PM EDT
Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: tknarr on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:09 PM EDT

For myself, I'd say make everything publicly available, comments and all. I made my comments knowing they'd be visible to the world and would be archived across the world (at the very least by people making their own copies for personal reference). I don't see what the Library wants to do as any different from what I expected.

More formally, you have my permission for my comments for any option you choose. And I vote for making everything, comments and all, publicly available.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Did they really spell it "Blawgs"??
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:13 PM EDT
Not a registered user, so I have no standing to comment on that, but think the whole kaboodle is necessary, as PJ articles sometimes draw from them, and the armchair lawyering is fun to read.

Nice work

[ Reply to This | # ]

I give you permission to use all anonymous postings n/t
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:16 PM EDT
.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Want Groklaw to e Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collection
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:18 PM EDT
My only hesitation is the number of silly and embarrassing comments I have made
here.

By all means include the entirety of Groklaw, the community is an important part
of what Groklaw is.

It is a great acknowledgment of the value you and your work leading this group
have brought to the subject.

---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
Authored by: nattt on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:18 PM EDT
Yes, all. Fine by me.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:20 PM EDT
By all means, please include the comments!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: cmcnabb on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:20 PM EDT
Include it all. 100 years from now the comments could well be more important
than the main article itself.


---
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the
government, there is tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes, everything
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:20 PM EDT
My vote is to let them have everything and show it all to everybody.

My opinion is that anybody who publishes anything on the Internet and thinks
that what they write won't be available to everybody forever is fooling
themselves.

Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com>

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:21 PM EDT
I think this is an incredible opportunity and I agree to it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw is your blog . Do what YOU think is best..
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:21 PM EDT
Congrats on the offer .

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:24 PM EDT
Anyone who posts anything on the internet does so with full knowledge that it
is, or could be made, public. Anyone who does not believe this is as self
deluding as SCO.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Thalaska on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:25 PM EDT
Congratulations PJ! Let them have all of it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: aslagle on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:27 PM EDT
Unequivocally, yes! Let everyone see the whole site!

After all, that's what we do here every day, and it wouldn't
be Groklaw without it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: fcw on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:27 PM EDT
It's already all here; I don't see why an official archive of it shouldn't be
all there too.

So, yes, I say they should take all of it, comments and all. Otherwise, they'll
be preserving a distorted picture for posterity, and what's the value in that?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes to all, open to all.
Authored by: arch_dude on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:28 PM EDT
I hereby grant permission for the library of congress to make my comments
available to anyone. I hereby grant PJ to permit the library of Congress to copy
my comments.

These permissions apply to comments I have entered both when logged in and when
not logged in.

(And I vote to turn over everything and to make it available to all.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: eschasi on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:28 PM EDT
I am in favor of this. Any of my postings may be included.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hopefully Grokdoc and Grokline, Too
Authored by: lnuss on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:32 PM EDT
I hope they will include Grokdoc and Grokline also, still important information.

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Go for it!
Authored by: joef on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:33 PM EDT
When I posted whatever I posted, I expected it to be seen without restriction.
Not all of it was relevant and some was flippant, but there it is FWIW. And the
"no restrictions" option is fine by me

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Stumbles on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:34 PM EDT
PJ this is indeed an honor for Groklaw. Personally I have no issue with making
all of Groklaw publicly accessible including comments. I can understand why some
might not want their comments publicly available.

However, anything you do on the Internet is hardly private to start with, just
ask those who were or have been embarrassed by the Way Back machine. As you have
discovered it is not all that easy keeping comments from "escaping into the
wild".

So I think anyone who has posted here that does not agree are trying to close
the barn door after the horse is out. At best it is a delusion on their part and
should have thought twice about clicking that "Submit Comment" button.
I think everyone should agree to this because it follows the true Open Source
tradition; Information wants to be freed.

Feel free to use my feeble comments in this grand archival project.

---
You can tuna piano but you can't tune a fish.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes, the whole enchilada
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:34 PM EDT
My posts have been a very paltry contribution, but the library is welcome to
them, and open to all. Really, it's the only way it should be.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Congratulations! My vote: put it all out there for all to see!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:35 PM EDT
This site is truly a vital part of legal history. From your reporting, to the
commenters' analyses, to the media reactions, virtually every facet of the US
Legal system has been displayed and dissected.

Groklaw should make an excellent resource for decades to come.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Adding my "yes you may do as you please with my posts"
Authored by: gumnos on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:36 PM EDT
there are a couple accidentally-anonymous posts signed "gumnos" as
well that you're welcome to as well.

-gumnos

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:36 PM EDT
I haven't made many comments, I've mostly read what PJ and others have done,
wonderfully well and thorough.

Whatever comments I've contributed in any small way I allow for use by the LOC.

Mark

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes but...DRM, OOXML?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:37 PM EDT
I agree with what to this point seems to be a general sentiment of Yes. My only
concerns would be around issues that have been discussed here previously.

Does the Library of Congress use DRM like the British Library does?

What formats will the content be made available in. .PDF, .DOC, .ODF, .DOCX ???
Or will it simply be an archive copy of the HTML site?

Does this concern anybody else? On balance I'd have say Yes anyway as I think
Groklaw is an incredibly valuable resource.

[ Reply to This | # ]

YES! n/t
Authored by: sgtrock on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:40 PM EDT
No more need be said. :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

What about Anonymous user postings?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:40 PM EDT
Will anonymous user postings be included?

Since you cannot attribute anonymous to a particular person, do you consider the
comments to be in the public domain?

How can you ask permission for comments posted anonymously if you do not know
who said it?

Of course, I am fine with my anonymous comments being in the Library of
Congress, but I have no way to show you that my comments are mine.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: talexb on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:41 PM EDT
Absolutely -- I'll be proud to look back at Groklaw in 25
years time and remember how important this site was at
shining a bright light on SCO's actions.

I haven't commented here many times, or significantly, but
I've had a link to Groklaw as part of my .sig on Perlmonks
for the last couple of years as my way to pass along news.

And I'm all for Digging For The Truth, whatever it may be.

YES!!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Steve Allen on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:42 PM EDT
Even though I haven't contributed anything particularly deep, you may distribute
my comments in any way you wish.

---
Music is Life
Life is Love
Love is Music
Music is Life

[ Reply to This | # ]

I have 6 categories
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:42 PM EDT
I have more or six categories written by me:

1. Totally anonymous
2. Using Alias_1 as a signature, not logged in
3. Using Alias_2 as a signature, not logged in
4. Using Alias_2 or 3, not logged in
5. Using Alias_1 as a signature and logged in
6. Using Alias_2 as a signature and logged in

(Quite a few of which I am embarrassed about...)

However, which of the above categories need I decide about?


/IMANAL aka IMANAL_TOO etc

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:43 PM EDT
I never managed to create an account and I only have a couple of comments, but
my feel is that comments ought to be included. Those of trolls too, all the
silly and clumsy attempts at muddling the waters are an essential part to
understand the motives behind Groklaw's following. Detractors may say that
Groklaws's user comments are skewed, but if this is so, why don't we have just
as many users defending SCO somewhere else?

[ Reply to This | # ]

This is quite an honor for you.
Authored by: tyche on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:45 PM EDT
PJ,

You have received awards including one that was quite scholarly. This goes
beyond even that. This is being archived by the ones who know how to do the
best possible to make an archive that will last for a very long time. This is
quite an honor to you for what you have achieved here. Congratulations.

That said, I feel as most (if not all) of the others when I say that you should
accept this honor, and that it should be complete with all the comments.
Therefore:

I, Craig A. Eddy (aka Tyche), do hereby release any copyright rights and
prerogatives for any comments I have made on this site, past, present, or
future, to Pamela Jones (aka PJ) as equitable tender for the instructional and
entertainment value of the work she has done in creating and maintaining the
site known as Grolkaw (http:www.groklaw.net). To which declaration I do affix
my name.

Craig A. Eddy (Tyche)


---
"The Truth shall Make Ye Fret"
"TRUTH", Terry Pratchett

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:45 PM EDT
Yes, include all of us anonymous posters. Just don't reveal our posting IP's.
k?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: micheal on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:50 PM EDT
I am in favor of all comments being released to the Library of Congress with no
access restrictions. I also see no reason to postpone until the (never ending)
end of the SCO saga. Everything is already publicly available.

---
LeRoy

[ Reply to This | # ]

In favor, but with a question...
Authored by: mtew on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:50 PM EDT
I've made a fool of myself a few time, mostly when off my anti-depressant
medication, but that's life. I am willing to 'let it all hang out' and in full
public view.

However, there is some stuff that is not for public display, but should almost
certainly be available to qualified researchers since there are significant
problems associated with the material.

The first set, with only minor problems, is the censored material. The material
deleted because it violated the sites rules. While this material is not for
public consumption, it really should be available to accredited researchers. It
would provide valuable information on the management of disent.

The second set of material that should only be available to qualified
researchers is the improperly redacted and other improperly released materials.
Again, very valuable, but there are liability issues attached to any record
containing this material.

---
MTEW

[ Reply to This | # ]

Defend fair use!
Authored by: Kevin on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:52 PM EDT
Try to make the case that archiving the site is fair
use of the commenters' material. Asking permission may dilute that claim down
the road because it could be taken as evidence that you believed the use wasn't
fair.

So: If you need my permission, YES. But you don't need it.

---
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin (P.S. My surname is not McBride!)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Licensing?
Authored by: speedy314 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:53 PM EDT
Two questions
1) Under what license would the materials be available from the Library of
Congress
2) Since the articles themselves are under a Creative Commons (BY NC ND 3.0),
couldn't they be included regardless of PJ's wishes so long as they met the
terms of the license? (Ignoring for a moment PJ's retained moral rights by the
license)

---
-
"Ancora Imparo" (I am still learning) -- Michaelangelo

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: jsoulejr on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:53 PM EDT
n/t

[ Reply to This | # ]

NewsPicks
Authored by: jsoulejr on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:54 PM EDT
n/t

[ Reply to This | # ]

You can use mine. But what about opt-out if you don't use opt-in?
Authored by: bugstomper on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:55 PM EDT
Clearly the Anonymous postings can be included. You have my permission for
anything posted under this nym.

However, I don't think that it will be wieldly for this thread to collect a
permission post from every registered user. Would it make sense to have a way of
polling registered members, or ask for emails? Or would you decide based on the
obvious majority in favor in this thread that you will go ahead but provide an
opt-out option?

I think that if you do include comments that you make it part of the privacy
policy of the site that by posting a comment the author agrees to give you the
necessary rights so that you don't have to ask for special permissions to
include them in the archive. I would not recommend complicating matters by
having an opt-out once you decide that comments are in general publishable in
the archive.

[ Reply to This | # ]

All things COMES here ..
Authored by: jsoulejr on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:55 PM EDT
Hope I got it right.

[ Reply to This | # ]

No Thread Here,
Authored by: LocoYokel on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:58 PM EDT
If any of you wish to indicate disagreement with this plan please do so here to
make it easier on PJ to count them. Just to avoid confusion over this thread, I
have voted yes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: cschoell on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:59 PM EDT
What a great honor, PJ! I think information wants to be free and if I ever
embarrassed myself here, it's already out there. I think you should make it
available to anyone for the sake of posterity.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: AceBtibucket on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 03:59 PM EDT
Yup, very much strongly in favor. And, I would recommend that we include
everything

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes
Authored by: seanlynch on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:02 PM EDT
I have only contributed one or two articles and my answer is yes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Should be all there - but what about member-only articles
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:02 PM EDT
I think articles & comments should be published, warts 'n all.

But perhaps not for the members-only articles. The author can choose best about
the article (mostly PJ I guess), but the comments may have been left with the
expectation of it being slightly more private.

I still think it's fine, but maybe not for everyone.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Aye!
Authored by: derobert on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:03 PM EDT
Yes to everything.

It's all out in public anyway.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:03 PM EDT
You are a farce give it up......

[ Reply to This | # ]

Whatever was written here, by anybody, cannot be denied. It can only be put in perspective.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:04 PM EDT
Whatever was written here, by anybody, cannot be denied.
It can only be put in perspective.

That's why I propose to let them have it all.

Although I have no standing, not being from the USA, not
having an account anymore (I think), though on the other
hand having been an avid daily reader and follower of
Groklaw since I think it must be 2003, please allow me
to use the first person plural:

We're about openness, aren't we.

bjd

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:07 PM EDT
Lets hope you can get an award I wonder who would show up....We all know you
dont exist. Hiding behind your web site I would pay to see you accept an award
for living a lie since you created this joke of a web site..

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Trolls are back - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:22 PM EDT
My opinion
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:07 PM EDT
PJ, you have to do this, for Linux, for the record, for history. You have to
archive the articles.

I give full permission for PJ to use all of my comments in any way, including
the Library of Congress thing.

If anyone wants otherwise on their own comments, I have a question: Suppose PJ
just sent her articles to the Library of Congress. Suppose some bright
researcher there saw various places where PJ, in an article, mentioned in an
update that a comment had raised a point that was worth adding to the article.
Now the researcher wants to see the comments. But they aren't in the Library of
Congress archive. What does said researcher do? Go to Groklaw, of course,
where the comments are still there, forever (or until ibiblio dies). So, not
archiving the comments to the Library of Congress just makes them a bit more
difficult to read, but won't slow down any halfway serious researcher. So, what
would be the point in not including the comments?

MSS2

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes, all, including comments.
Authored by: dwiget001 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:07 PM EDT
And that's all I have to say.

[ Reply to This | # ]

My thoughts
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:08 PM EDT
Going forward, my biggest fear are those that would want immortal glory archived
at the LOC with troll posts. PJ has done a decent job of getting those posts
that are way out of line removed, but it is possible that they might not be
removed in time before the next scan takes place by the LOC.

There are also some posts that some users might not be proud of making (myself
included), and we wish they were removed shortly after they were posted, but we
don't have any method of a user removing their own post in a timely manner. Of
course, that "feature" could also be abused by trolls.

Even though the webite states "Comments are owned by the individual
posters", if I cannot remove my comment, I don't own it, although I am
still responsible for the posting of it. I think that once a comment is made,
it is a part of the website and so all comments should be included in this
archiving project. You have my vote to include them all, including mine. Of
course, I would prefer to have my comments attached to my original account, but
until then, I will continue to sign them with:

-the former DodgeRules-

(I may not always agree, but I will never hide behind an anonymous post like the
trolls do.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: dracoverdi on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:13 PM EDT
Yes.

It is a wonderful part of our country's history, both because of the importance
of the record of the SCO litigation, and because it records the amazing
cooperative effort that became Groklaw.


If they make a movie out of it, they can call it:

"The Strange Case Of The Red Dress"

---
The problem with ignorance is that the afflicted are unaware of their ailment

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:18 PM EDT
Yes

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sure, go ahead
Authored by: inode_buddha on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:24 PM EDT
Sure, archive the entire thing. I would like to see a special area for the
actual PDF's with their corresponding transcripts though at the LoC.

---
-inode_buddha

"When we speak of free software,
we are referring to freedom, not price"
-- Richard M. Stallman

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: emk on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:24 PM EDT
YES

emk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:25 PM EDT
Lots of anon posts from fixed IP, so identifiable - go for it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Steve Martin on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:26 PM EDT
I can of course only speak for myself, not for the other posters here (and
certainly not for PJ); however, for myself, I hereby give permission to the
Library of Congress to include any or all of my posts.

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: w30 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:29 PM EDT
Yes to everything now and future.

---
Yes, I dual boot but both are Linux distributions. One to use and one to play
with and experiment on :=)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:29 PM EDT
Even if google doesn't index comments, anyone can come here and search the site,
including comments. Therefore, I think we should allow the whole thing to be
archived and viewed by anyone. It is not as if the audience for Library of
Congress archives is huge.

Perhaps just as google is prevented from indexing comments here, would that be
maintained for this archive?

[ Reply to This | # ]

What about logfiles?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:31 PM EDT
Hi there.
I just thought about what future generation might be interested in from
groklaw.
Groklaw is - in my eyes - a historic project in many points and with world wide
relation and therfore important for future research.
Jurists, Economists, Sociologists just to name a few.
Given a scientific theme, there can come up quantifiable questions on traffic by
topic, regional distribution or whatever.
Generally asked, are there any cumulated statistics available? (I have not
looked for yet)
And further: is it worth to archive logfiles, and if so,
what about privacy, anonymized data or logfile locking for let us say next 100
years and a public release then?
see also: important stuff: Your IP address will be recorded, but NOT made
public.
But none of us will care in 100 years.

Best regards from Munich

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Ptraci on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:33 PM EDT
The few comments I've made have been trivial. I don't care if they get archived
somewhere or not. I do think it would be a shame to leave out those comments by
others that have filled out my understanding of the workings of our justice
system.

[ Reply to This | # ]

(C) 2010 Pamela Jones
Authored by: Leg on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:34 PM EDT
.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes - to everything
Authored by: hopbine on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:34 PM EDT
Why not - anyone can look at Groklaw itself

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes.
Authored by: RPN on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:34 PM EDT
Unquestionably yes, full access.

It's out there anyway but this is a way to guarantee it survives and I do think
it matters sites like this are preserved officially. (Here in the UK the British
Library is currently consulting on how to do a similar thing and I wish them
well because it does matter we preserve at least a real selection.) Silly as
some of my comments may seem in hindsight, it is that very human character and
interaction that is part of what makes it important to preserve. People can look
back and see from the comments how groups were thinking, responding to issues
etc.

So PJ if you need my permission then you have it. Full public access.
Congratulations on being asked too!

Richard.

[ Reply to This | # ]

never liked blocking search/archive in the first place
Authored by: xtifr on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:36 PM EDT
The Internet Archive is already associated with the Smithsonian; it's
interesting that the Library of Congress seems to feel the need to create its
own separate archives. Still, when it comes to keeping records, I suppose
redundancy can be a good thing. Doubly good in this case, since it can
sometimes catch sites like GL that aren't on the Archive. Anyway I've always
been in the minority that was in favor of having Groklaw archived and indexed,
so obviously I'm still in favor in this instance.

---
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to
light.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I think it is a great idea
Authored by: jbb on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:37 PM EDT
The more backups the better. Congrats PJ.


---
You just can't win with DRM.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Please do and include all the comments right back to the early blog days
Authored by: NZheretic on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:37 PM EDT
The SCO Group legal actions are worthy of deep inspection by those involved
in legal profession for perpetuity.

Since this may involve putting a copy of the content onto Hard drive for direct

shipping, could you also forward said copies of Groklaw to the US Federal Trade

Commission, US Securities and Exchange Commission, Various Bar associations
and any other agencies responsible for dealing with issues such as fraud and
antitrust violations?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Red Dress
Authored by: nola on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:38 PM EDT
Did they ask for the Red Dress to be included in the Museum of American
History?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:40 PM EDT
Of course.
I am very much in awe of the whole Groklaw effort.
Even if some Groklaw member once tracked my IP number and thought I was a
WELL KNOWN REALLY EVIL BELGIAN. Since in reality I'm a total unknown, only
slightly tarnished and that only on bad days (albeit, living in Belgium). That
was
a bit of a bummer, but I got over it, I think.
I do have a cat, though... mwohahahahaaaaa

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: codermotor on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:40 PM EDT

I have nothing to hide or be ashamed about in any of the few comments I have posted. Even when I was wrong. I consider this a public forum anyway so it's really a moot point now anyway.

Let 'em have it all, I say. If someone would rather the world not know what they think or thought, they should have given that more consideration before they hit the Submit button. Again, it's too late now anyway, since it's already here.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes, comments and all!
Authored by: cybervegan on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:43 PM EDT
The comments are very important to understanding the background of the
articles,
the surrounding opinions and discussion. I think it all needs to go in there.

We told you that what you were doing was important, those times when you nearly
quit.

We know it's taken a chunk out of you, but you keep on going, because you know
it is needed.

And so, you see, the recognition keeps flooding in.

Congratulations, PJ, and thankyou for sticking it out!

Regards,
-cybervegan

---
Software source code is a bit like underwear - you only want to show it off in
public if it's clean and tidy. Refusal could be due to embarrassment or shame...

[ Reply to This | # ]

GO FOR IT!!!
Authored by: bb5ch39t on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:43 PM EDT
Way to go! Full steam ahead.

[ Reply to This | # ]

You're already archived anyway
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:45 PM EDT
Right back to the beginn ing of Groklaw

[ Reply to This | # ]

Millions of lines of our valuable IP in comments
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:46 PM EDT
It has come to our attention that millions and millions of lines of IP have been stolen from our subsidary Trolls&Astroturfers Inc., and placed into the comments section. Although some of our IP has subsequently been removed, other parts have been fed.

We own the Troll++ languages, and have licensed them out many times.

Without our valuable IP, Groklaw would have just remained an obscure website. Our valuable IP must have been inserted into the comments by a team of IBM lawyers, adding enterprise support for Multithreaded Trolling, and making Groklaw the site it is now.

We have clear proof of this, located in a highly secure briefcase. We are willing to show proof, and identify Troll posts to anyone willing to sign our NDA (which forbids commenting on the quality or lack thereof, of our claims). We refuse to identify our IP in the comments without an NDA, for proof denies faith, and without faith our claims are nothing.

We must protect our valuable IP, however we understand the desire of others to continue to use our valuable IP. Therefore, we have decided to offer a mutually beneficial agreement, where if you hurry to accept our GPL-incompatible End User Soul Transfer Agreement for the small price of $699, we agree not to sue you (unless we change our mind) for downloading any archived content from the Library of Congress which does or doesn't contain our valuable IP.

This is a limited time only offer, so hurry.

\Plc (Guvf vf n cnebql.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: AH1 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 04:49 PM EDT
Yes to all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: cpeterson on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:02 PM EDT
Absolutely.

If we try to withhold our history from the future, we merely grant our enemies
leave to supplant it with distortion.

cpeterson, WINAL

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: Sunny Penguin on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:04 PM EDT
My vote is for everything.
As far as I am concerned, PJ owns all of my Groklaw comments.

/Do we need to draft an APA? LOL...

---
EOD is a science of vague assumptions based on debatable data taken from
inconclusive experiments with instruments of problematic accuracy by persons of
questio

[ Reply to This | # ]

Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
Authored by: scooterJRT on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:05 PM EDT
Certainly yes, and congratulations PJ on the many recognitions of the value of
what you started--and maintained with great energy and integrity.

Re comments, I'd suggest that they _all_ should be included, even those that
are trivial (as were most of mine.) The LoC is viewing this as a resource for
research; omission of full comment threads and external links such as News
Picks would greatly diminish Groklaw's research value.

James Beckwith

[ Reply to This | # ]

comments only visible to Congress
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:06 PM EDT
I have been an anonymous cowherder since the beginning of the site. I think it
is good to archive the site, but the comments are a mixed bag. I vote for this
option:

"One possible middle road would be to allow the comments only in the
collection available only to Congress, but not to the offsite public."

[ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes! Yes! Yes!All of it!
    Authored by: gfreeves on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:08 PM EDT
    I've been mostly a lurker, but I have read almost all of the comments for years. It'll be quite a sociological masterpiece for the researchers to study. I want the world to know it all! And it may prevent something like this ever happening again! Yes, you have my permission!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Include it all!
    Authored by: rsi on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:08 PM EDT
    Redacting ANYTHING will only alter history. It is important to preserve all
    including comments. I have nothing to hide.

    Congratulations PJ!

    Rick

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Trull Scrub-o-matic?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:11 PM EDT
    Is there anything we can do with older materials for de-trollification before
    archiving? Is that even a worthwhile goal, or should troll-stomping be
    considered part of what we do?

    Apart from that question, I'm decidedly in the all-in, open access camp

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The ultimate victory.
    Authored by: Prototrm on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:16 PM EDT
    A definitive "yes".

    This is the ultimate victory for Groklaw in that the truth will be permanently
    preserved for the future, as will the dedication and perseverance of everyone
    here, most especially PJ.

    Ordinary people *can* make a difference!

    ---
    "Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the
    exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    everything and open to anyone
    Authored by: rsmith on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:19 PM EDT
    That would get my vote.

    After all, that is already what one gets when reading Groklaw now. Personally I
    don't see the need for further restrictions.

    ---
    Intellectual Property is an oxymoron.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Honoured to say yes.
    Authored by: darkonc on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:22 PM EDT
    There's nothing said here that I'm too embarrassed about to let it go on the public record..

    ---
    Powerful, committed communication. Touching the jewel within each person and bringing it to life..

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: eggplant37 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:24 PM EDT
    Knowing I've had an active part here since the Daimler suit, I'll
    only say this: This is the reason I thought I should help. I'm
    glad to have been a part. Yes, emphatically yes, allow this to
    happen.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: charlie Turner on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:26 PM EDT
    I'm in with everything.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The Truth Wants To Be Free!
    Authored by: hAckz0r on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:27 PM EDT
    PJ,

    I can't say how happy I am that they would think to honour you in such a way. This is the moment you have been waiting for as I see it, and the chance to say that you are more than just a legitimate and worthy Blogger. Your hard work has paid off in ways you probably never realized, in that so many people now look up to you, and respect your work. It should be archived as a piece of American History, and held up as a model for others to follow. You have single handedly lead the way to fill the void between the two worlds of the Legal Justice system and the World of Technology, and the benefits are now just being realized by people other than us geeks. This is your day to be honoured by historians and future generations, far beyond beyond just the obscure wayback archive, so please keep up the good work.

    Please do look towards the future, in that you will now have a slightly bigger soap box to stand on. You will have even more opportunity to discuss the meaning of "standards" and then even more influence to see that the Government archive system actually understands them too.

    The only question I would raise about adding to the archive would be pertaining to the topics in the 'members only', and whether you think those should be included. I'll simply trust your judgement on that one. No one should have felt that what they said there should be any more or less private, as I felt that it was more or less just preparation for an upcoming story without the anonymous hecklers added to be a distraction. It's your call. Its your archive.

    Oh, can we take up a collection for the "Red Dress Fund" yet? I just want to see a photograph of the one you choose, on a hanger is good enough for me. Its symbolic you know...

    ---
    DRM - As a "solution", it solves the wrong problem; As a "technology" its only 'logically' infeasible.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: comms-warrior on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:34 PM EDT
    To get a complete picture, you should include ALL information from the site.
    Every comment, every feeling and emotion as articulated in words.

    That's my opinion.

    Chris.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Jimbob0i0 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:34 PM EDT
    Vote from me for archive everything open to all for eternity so that the next
    'SCO' that tries something with Linux IP can be pointed to the congress
    collection of what happened last time ;)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: IANALitj on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:36 PM EDT
    I have already given my personal response as a minor player -- yes, include
    everything, and as public and for as long as you wish.

    Since this seems to be the overwhelming consensus, I think there should be a
    thread or perhaps an entire new article to collect any non-acquiescences.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: tpassin on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:40 PM EDT
    Pamela, you have my permission to archive with the Library Of Congress or
    elsewhere, all my comments to any material that has appeared or will appear on
    Groklaw.

    I think it would be a very good thing for all of the site to be archived.
    Surely everyone who was moved to post must have known that all the material
    would potentially be viewed by any member of the public. So I hope that
    everyone will give permission, too.

    Great work, PJ!

    ---
    Tom Passin

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    What about the Comes Exhibits/Other Stuff?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:40 PM EDT
    Will those things be included also? How close are the Comes Exhibits to being
    done?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Ursus_Orribilus on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:49 PM EDT
    Absolutely! Every word and link-- and all comments.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: euler on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:52 PM EDT
    I can't seem to find what comments I've made (I don't think there's many), but
    I'd be fine with having any of them included.

    +1

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 05:59 PM EDT
    I'd be confused about the logic of anyone who had posted
    comments to a public blog and then was somehow too shy to
    have their public comments made public :-)

    You can certainly pass on everything I've ever said.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: drh on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:00 PM EDT
    Send it all in!

    ---
    Just another day...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    "only to Congress" ???
    Authored by: Christian on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:00 PM EDT
    I am not sure where the "only to Congress" idea came from. This issue is whether the archive is only available to patrons physically at the Library of Congress in Washington or if it will also be available over the web. Anyone can walk into the Library of Congress and see almost anything there. The letter explains it:
    The Library will make this collection available to researchers onsite at Library facilities. The Library also wishes to make the collection available to offsite researchers by hosting the collection on the Library's public access Web site.
    I have never done any research there, but I have wandered in just to look at the amazing architecture.

    Regardless, PJ and Groklaw can do whatever they want with any of my old posts (or future ones).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes
    Authored by: seantellis on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:01 PM EDT
    Of course. This will be a fascinating historical record of a corporate
    implosion.

    Sean Ellis.

    ---
    Sean Ellis (groklaw@moteprime.remove-this.org)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: songmaster on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:03 PM EDT
    Heck yeah, with comments. It would be a tragedy if everything here were lost to
    posterity (Hello, posterity!).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: fava on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:03 PM EDT
    I have not posted in years, but I heartily agree that everything must be
    archived.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes
    Authored by: jacks4u on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:08 PM EDT
    Yes! All of it.

    and Congratulations.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: ysesq on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:13 PM EDT
    by all means. everything should be there in the interest of transparency.


    ---
    ---
    Yohann Sulaiman

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    No.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:19 PM EDT
    I do not approve any of my comments to be used in such manner.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Yes. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:22 PM EDT
      • NO again - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:26 PM EDT
        • NO again - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 12:42 AM EDT
    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: billposer on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:20 PM EDT
    Include it all. I certainly wouldn't have posted comments here that I didn't
    intend to be publicly accessible.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: venn on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:22 PM EDT
    Everything should be included, it is what defines this site.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    "only to Congress" ???
    Authored by: Christian on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:24 PM EDT
    I am not sure where the "only to Congress" idea came from. This issue is whether the archive is only available to patrons physically at the Library of Congress in Washington or if it will also be available over the web. Anyone can walk into the Library of Congress and see almost anything there. The letter explains it:
    The Library will make this collection available to researchers onsite at Library facilities. The Library also wishes to make the collection available to offsite researchers by hosting the collection on the Library's public access Web site.
    I have never done any research there, but I have wandered in just to look at the amazing architecture.

    Regardless, PJ and Groklaw can do whatever they want with any of my old posts (or future ones).

    PS: I tried to post this a few times, and it didn't go through. If duplicates show up later, that is why.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes
    Authored by: dan_stephans on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:25 PM EDT
    I don't think the record is complete or useful without all the comments.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Library of Congress?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:26 PM EDT
    Does that run on Linux?

    Who holds copy/publishing rights?

    Do they use open formats/standards?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Nigel on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:29 PM EDT
    Definitely. Comments as well.
    Congratulations, PJ - It's the least you deserve after all the hard work and
    hassles.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: kjb on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:33 PM EDT
    Yes, absolutely. Open and free to everyone.
    And Congratulations, PJ, thanks for the great leadership.

    ---
    keithdotburt at gmail dot com
    Copyright info in bio

    "No! Try not. Do, or do not. There is no try."
    - Yoda

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    But...how do you and LoC sort it all out?
    Authored by: talldad on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:40 PM EDT
    I give permission for all my comments to be publicly available for historical
    research purposes as requested by the Library of Congress.

    PJ, I see so many enthusiastic Yes answers but I hope this bit of my response is
    not just a pernickety bit of pedantry.

    Across the years and thousands upon thousands of postings, how do you manage the
    problem of
    a) those who choose to say No to their comments going public
    b) those who don't respond at all?
    and
    c) any differences in the levels of permission you receive?


    ---
    John Angelico
    Down Under fan &
    OS/2 SIG Co-Ordinator

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:47 PM EDT
    Most or all of my posts over the last 6+ years have been anonymous (from a few
    different locations, some of which have dynamic IPs unfortunately), and none of
    them is particularly important or interesting. But I definitely grant PJ
    whatever permissions are needed to complete this archiving.

    I believe the whole site should be archived, including all of the comments (and
    anonymous comments too).

    Even though the copyright on a comment belongs to the person who posted it, I
    think the very act of posting it to a public Internet blog should give implied
    permission for it to be archived in a public, permanent form. Legally I don't
    know if it holds up, but morally I think PJ will be completely justified if she
    allows the whole site to be archived including all of the comments.

    Even if she wanted to print them into a book and sell it commercially, I can't
    see any reason not to allow that!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Read the ToS - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:31 PM EDT
    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: hans on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:48 PM EDT
    First, yes, publish it all, for anyone to see.

    And second, its cool seeing all the low UID's.

    Regards,

    Hans

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Shadow Wrought on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:48 PM EDT
    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to archive the Web
    site identified above for inclusion in the Library's collection of Web
    materials."

    And...

    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public
    access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the
    Library's public Web site."

    I'm cool with both. If the majority goes for both main stories and comments you
    might add an opt-out clause for anyone who wishes their comments removed. It
    might prove difficult if other people were quoting from it, but I think that's
    just something you have to live with.

    Frankly, you are posting to a public site which is free and open to the entire
    world at any given time. It only makes sense for the LoC to archive in total,
    just like it is, IMHO.

    That plus future generations will forever be asking the question: just who is
    that briliant Shadow Wrought, and why didn't he post more of his enlightened
    reasoning?

    Or not:-)

    ---
    "It's a summons." "What's a summons?" "It means summon's in trouble." -- Rocky
    and Bullwinkle

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    yes
    Authored by: ciaran on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:57 PM EDT
    Yes, I grant permission for this. (Ciarán O'Riordan)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    What about the "no"s
    Authored by: kh on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 06:58 PM EDT
    While I'm happy for my comments to be included under a cc license is this going
    to be a democratic decision or consensus or can people who disagree withdraw
    their comments?

    I assume anonymous commenters don't get that option as they effectively gave
    their comments away to PJ.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Where's the vote Yes and Vote No threads?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:00 PM EDT
    I'll start them. But I'm not logged in.

    --Celtic_hackr

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Vote Yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:01 PM EDT
      • Yes! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:04 PM EDT
    • Vote No - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:03 PM EDT
    • Vote yesno - Authored by: stegu on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:54 AM EDT
    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: TheBlueSkyRanger on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:07 PM EDT
    Hey PJ!

    Yes, all comments, including mine. Yes, that includes the ones where I look
    like a chump. After all, some people may have questions reflected by my thought
    process, and me getting schooled can help teach them.

    To say nothing of the bad jokes, Usenet taglines, and so on. ;-)

    Dobre utka,
    The Blue Sky Ranger

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I gess that meas Groklaw has ...
    Authored by: dmarker on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:13 PM EDT

    made MOG famous and eternal !!!.

    If that proves true I regret it :) :) :)

    DSM

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Minor problems
    Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:15 PM EDT
    The consensus appears to be overwhelmingly yes with comments.

    There may be problems with Anonymous comments, however as long as Anonymous
    means Anonymous I don't think that will matter.

    One thing I think needs to be sorted is should articles with active comment's
    threads be archived?

    I personally think no, mainly because as a user with an account I get the option
    to delete comments for a wile and would not want a comment I deleted turning up
    on another website.

    I doubt that the bot will have an account so member's only articles would not
    get archived while still in that state.

    ---
    Beware of him who would deny you access to information for in his heart he
    considers himself your master.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Groklaw, Copyrights - Suggestion for the future
    Authored by: ghost on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:17 PM EDT
    In the footer, you have this;

    ------------------------
    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2010 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective
    owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )
    ------------------------


    If this inclusion is accepted, i would suggest that you include a line that
    "by writing on this site, you, the contributor, grant an irrevocable
    license to the library of congress to copy and republish your posts, in any
    form, and by any means." or some similar wording to the same effect.

    This, just to exclude any future problems with any disputes about this subject,
    and make this exclusion.
    This doesn't mean the authors will lose their rights, just offer a license to
    the library..

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Absolutely, all of it
    Authored by: juliac on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:19 PM EDT
    It's already all publicly available here, also a good chunk on the wayback
    machine, and probably other public and private archives, it's the nature of the
    beast. The situation might be slightly different if the proposed use were for
    private gain, but I don't see any reason for anyone to object to archiving at
    the Library of Congress.

    ---
    Have you contributed to Groklaw lately?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: egan on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:19 PM EDT

    Yes, everything, and open to everyone.

    Absolutely, positively and without a doubt. Our Open letter to Darl McBride alone is an historic document.

    So is the explanation of computation theory for lawyers, as just one exemplary item. And everything else, to a lesser degree.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: sjohnson on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:24 PM EDT
    I'll keep it nice an simple.


    Yes.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: john-from-ct on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:25 PM EDT
    PJ:

    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to archive the Web
    site identified above for inclusion in the Library's collection of Web
    materials."

    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public
    access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the
    Library's public Web site."

    For my meager contributions.



    ---
    Just another greybeard geek!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Archive and make available.
    Authored by: stats_for_all on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:27 PM EDT
    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the Library's public Web site."

    Articles, Comments, Documents, search cache, and layouts, include it all.

    Technically, how archivable is Geeklog PHP. Will future implementation break the database > parseable html process.

    Is the archiving a specialized spider of the site, or a mirror of the geeklog file system.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: STrRedWolf on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:28 PM EDT
    Archiving of comments by STrRedWolf is granted.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: /Arthur on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:29 PM EDT
    I think the LOC can buy a hammer and a chisel
    and start to hammer the whole story in to granite.

    Gratz PJ
    /Arthur

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:31 PM EDT
    Although they are not worth much, please include all my posts.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes + Permission from me
    Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:34 PM EDT
    For whatever my occasional posts will add to the story, you have my permission
    to include them in the Library of Congress, accessible for all time.

    Gawrsh, I'd be published then!!! ^_^

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: hcg50a on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:39 PM EDT
    Yes, include articles and comments -- everything.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Scott_Lazar on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:41 PM EDT
    Simple opt-in for those who wish to contribute comments - update your logonid
    comments to give permission. Between now and when the information is to be
    given to LOC, at regular intervals, publish a short reminder article to prod the
    stragglers. Anyone who doesn't opt-in is left behind.

    ---
    Scott
    -------------------------
    LINUX - VISIBLY superior!
    --------------------------------------

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:41 PM EDT
    Definitely! I say go for it! Future generations definitely need to know.

    -Vivin Paliath

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    A Haiku for the Occasion
    Authored by: Steve Martin on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:46 PM EDT
    Seat of government.
    You have a large library.
    Groklaw joins it soon.


    ---
    "When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: mattw on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:49 PM EDT
    Add another to the yes pile.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Einhverfr on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:51 PM EDT
    Sounds like a great opportunity!

    Sure, also if comments are archived, include my comments....

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: MDT on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 07:57 PM EDT
    Sure PJ, anything I posted you can contribute.

    ---
    MDT

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Groklaw as a whole...
    Authored by: proceng on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:11 PM EDT
    The entire site from the home page all the way through the exhibits should be made available (with personally identifiable information redacted from the profiles). When someone signs their post with their name, they are giving the site permission to make said information available.

    By making the entire site available, there are resources included that may not be available anywhere else, but are important for a complete understanding of what Groklaw is, what it represents and most importantly what it means to be a member of a community that is dedicated to educating lawyers about geeks and geeks about the law.

    With the inclusion of the more esoteric parts of the site (Grokdoc, the GPL, the Court system etc) researchers can see an entire educational resource built from one person's dream into a powerful tool.

    Groklaw, under Pamela's coaching, has grown from an interesting experiment into a resource that puts most major publications dedicated to news of legal and technical interest to shame. This is a site that should be required reading for anybody who aspires to accuracy in journalism.

    Even when one of us is mistaken in a specific area, the others gently (or not so gently) try to convince them to keep an open mind, rather than force them to change. That keeps us strong. Pamela keeps us honest. We do our part by participating in this grand experiment that has now been noticed by all who seek to understand the world as it pertains to technology and the law.

    Please, PJ, make sure that the LOC is going to provide this information along side the other tidbits of history that will explain to those who come after what one dedicated person can accomplish as a leader.

    Take a bow, you earned it. The rest of us are the supporting cast, because without you as the champion this site would never have gained the respect that it richly deserves.

    For my part, while I have made mistakes in some of my posts, I stand by what I have said.

    Feel free to include any and all of my posts in whatever format you deem appropriate. Electronically signed release on it's way.

    ---
    And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
    John 8:32(King James Version)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: ilde on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:14 PM EDT
    Yes, please include my modest participations.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    How much data is there?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:23 PM EDT
    So how many GBs does it take to include the sum total of Groklaw?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: xetheriel on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:28 PM EDT
    This thrilled me when I saw it, and would love nothing more than to be a part of
    it! What an honour!

    You have an enthusiastic yes here. :)

    X

    ---
    Xetheriel
    The wheel of time forever turns, and history repeats.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:34 PM EDT
    I'm not sure I've seen as much "good government"
    schnookism as this in one place in my life. Hello?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    PJ condition
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:35 PM EDT
    PJ you have my permission to use any of my postings I've made as you see fit. I
    ask only that you impress upon the Library of Congress, that the Library
    maintain a non proprietary access method. It may be understood but this is an
    occasion worthy of commemorating and rededication.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, everything included
    Authored by: vb on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:48 PM EDT

    I'd guess the Groklaw is historic in the fact that Groklaw is probably the first
    instance of complex litigation documented on-line (using both text and HTML).
    Add to that the fact that almost all legal proceedings of the SCO saga have been
    analyzed and debated on-line.

    Groklaw is a national treasure to legal education in this country. Until some
    other case is as well documented, analyzed and debated on-line, Groklaw is
    without peer.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: tjwhaynes on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:52 PM EDT
    Yes - everything. I give permission for my meagre contributions to be added to
    the collection.

    ---
    Anything I say is my opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of IBM Canada

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: dmomara on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 08:58 PM EDT
    Yes.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Further highlights the lunacy of copyright
    Authored by: thorpie on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:00 PM EDT

    This is one subject that really does highlight the lunacy of our copyright system.

    Comments are an integral part of the website. The insights that comments have provided have often been stunning, they provide much of the meat to PJ's skeleton. The kernel insight that a single comment provides is generally not replicated. If others think along the same lines they either do not add further comment or they add sub-comments to the comment containing the kernel of the insight. It appears to be rare that a comment appears that has a kernel insight that no-one else has thought of.

    Allowing a contributor the right to delete their comments raises problems. What do you do with the sub-comments, without their parent they are completely out of context? Given that the kernel insight of a comment is not generally uniquely a thought of the one individual, and that if this individual had not commented then someone else would have added a comment with the same kernel insight, should the individual have a right to delete their comment? Deleting their comment removes not only their expressive verbage but also the kernel insight. This kernel insight would have been expressed by someone else if the individual had not added their comment first.

    Me, I completely disagree with copyright in any case. Nemes appear and become entangled and associated with one piece of expressive verbage. By allowing a person to control their expressive verbage we will often allow them to exert some control over the associated neme. It is simply censorship by another name.

    ---
    The memories of a man in his old age are the deeds of a man in his prime - Floyd, Pink

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Inclusion: Yes, Please and Thank you
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:01 PM EDT
    All of it, unrestricted, open to all who care to look.

    <opinion>
    This site has been, is, and almost certainly will continue to be a treasure, and
    to serve as an example of "how it should be done".
    </opinion>

    And to Ms Jones, the great PJ: It is impossible to express my gratitude for
    establishing Groklaw. A place you created where we arrive with our varied ideas
    and beliefs, and leave with greater understanding.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes!
    Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:01 PM EDT

    Everyone of my comments was made knowing that this is a public forum. I'm quite
    happy to have everything of mine available both on and off site.


    ---
    Wayne

    http://madhatter.ca/

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Of Course !!
    Authored by: froggie on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:04 PM EDT
    Any and all posts that I made here were with the understanding that PJ could do whatever she wished with them. I don't think that any of my posts are worth conserving for posterity, but as a minuscule part of the enormous treasure that is Groklaw, perhaps they are. Go for it !!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: jvillain on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:08 PM EDT
    Open got us this far. It would be silly to get off the bus now.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    yes, certainly (despite any stupid comments I may have made)
    Authored by: veatnik on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:09 PM EDT
    In all I think the complete record at Groklaw is of great value both from the
    content with regards to the primary subject and due to the style of interaction
    even when there is occasional disagreement. In all a great example of content
    with great value an an example of civil discourse in a medium (the internet)
    that all too often fails the civility test elsewhere.

    PJ, you did a great job laying down ground rules that make Groklaw a haven in
    which I felt comfortable.

    Thanks!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes with all comments, open to the public (N/T)
    Authored by: pajamian on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:11 PM EDT

    ---
    Windows is a bonfire, Linux is the sun. Linux only looks smaller if you lack perspective.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    A correction
    Authored by: barbacana on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:16 PM EDT

    PJ wrote:

    One possible middle road would be to allow the comments only in the collection available only to Congress, but not to the offsite public

    The Library of Congress is available to the public, not just Congress. I believe the choice on offer is to make the collection available onsite only, or to make it available on the web. In either case it would be available to the public.

    It used to be possible for anyone who could travel to Washington DC to walk into one of the Library of Congress buildings and read the materials there. Now, access is restricted to people over 16 who can present suitable ID. The government could easily restrict access in the future by defining what constitutes "suitable" ID more narrowly than at present; for example, it could restrict access to US citizens, or to people never convicted of a felony, or to people not on the no-fly list, etc.

    I am in favor of making the entire contents of Groklaw, including all comments, available to everybody, i.e. accessible onsite and via the internet. I am strongly opposed to making the Groklaw comments available if access will be restricted to onsite access at the Library of Congress.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes
    Authored by: brindafella on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:18 PM EDT
    I hereby allow any comments by me (brindafella) to be included in the LoC
    collection, including for public perusal.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:25 PM EDT
    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:22 PM EDT
    Yes, definitely. This is a fantastic example of how to record and follow an
    issue, with all things involved.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: elrond_2003 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:24 PM EDT
    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public
    access to
    the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the Library's

    public Web site."


    ---
    free as in speech.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: afeldspar on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:40 PM EDT
    Don't know if anything I've posted here would be on the list to be archived, but
    if it is, I certainly give my permission...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: tredman on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:44 PM EDT
    It's most certainly been a while since I've posted anything, though Groklaw is
    still on my daily reading list, no matter how busy I may be. I can't speak for
    anybody else, but I have no problem having any of my comments included in that
    archive. I don't know how scholarly any of them are, but they're certainly a
    tiny part of a very large picture, and I would be proud to have them included.

    Tim

    ---
    Tim
    "I drank what?" - Socrates, 399 BCE

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Legal status of comments and the contents of the site?
    Authored by: vonbrand on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:49 PM EDT

    I understood all my comments were (implicitly) donated to the site (i.e., PJ), under the CC license of the site. If this is wrong, I hereby state this explicitly.

    Big problem is that if this isn't so, AFAIU PJ would need the permission of each and every contributor (even the ubiquitous Anonymous). How can PJ arrange to collect all those persmissions (either "for all my comments", or "only for comments X, Y, Z")? Would it have to be in writing (on paper, signed)?

    PJ's articles are under a CC license, so in principle the LoC shouldn't have to even ask to publish just that...

    Nice mess ;-)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Raymee on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:52 PM EDT
    Yes! And everything should be available so far as I'm concerned. Congratulations
    on being selected as if anyone deserves it, you do PJ!

    ---
    ...and this too, shall pass... (the only real question is WHEN!!!)

    PJ has full permission to use my comments as she pleases!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: SilverWave on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:55 PM EDT
    Short Answer: Yes to all, that is Groklaw and Comments, including mine.

    Longer Answer: On reviewing some of my comments I have winced a little bit at
    one or two, not surprising on reflection, as we certainly didn't think they
    would be given this level of attention. That said this is a huge honour for
    Groklaw and we really cant say no.

    Well done PJ and congratulations, its been a blast :-)

    ---
    RMS: The 4 Freedoms
    0 run the program for any purpose
    1 study the source code and change it
    2 make copies and distribute them
    3 publish modified versions

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    All
    Authored by: Tufty on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:56 PM EDT
    This has all been produced in the full public vision. I can see no good reason
    for restricting something that has already been seen. I have known this when
    posting so I see no good reason from excluding my posts from this, even the
    squirrel brained ones.

    My vote
    All in there and open

    My comments
    All in there and open


    ---
    Linux powered squirrel.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Osvaldo Marques on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 09:57 PM EDT
    Hi PJ!

    What a remarkable job you and all groklawers have done on these last
    seven years! The world is a better place from the moment Groklaw was
    available.

    I believe mankind deserves whole Groklaw be available for
    generations to come.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:10 PM EDT
    Yes, include my mundane remarks...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, to archive, comments and republishing
    Authored by: afruss on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:21 PM EDT
    All posts and comments are important.

    I want my children to understand that I saw history being made.

    I see myself as a Groklawyer (IANAL).

    With a little perspective on what we lived through in the SCO years, it is even
    more important to ensure that the entire corpus of Groklaw is available to the
    public into the future. Lest it happen again (ok, where it happens again).

    Andrew

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes! Everything! Always!
    Authored by: R.A.G. on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:24 PM EDT
    P.J. Everything you have done on Groklaw has been about being open with the
    truth.

    Let them have everything.
    The Truth!
    The whole truth! and
    Nothing but the truth!

    It's your blog. We all started as guests. You let us stay and become family.
    You've always made the rules. If we didn't like them we were allowed to leave.
    Don't stop making the rules.

    For the objectors to this proposal. If you didn't want anyone to hear what you
    had to say you could have kept your mouth shut and your comments to yourself.

    Groklaw is already public and available to anyone who wants to access. All the
    Library of Congress is doing is asking to be allowed to maintain that state for
    you.

    Let them have at it!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I vote Yes... they can copy all
    Authored by: dbmuse on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:26 PM EDT
    Copy is good. Sharing is good. Removing anything would be bad.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: om1er on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:27 PM EDT
    I happily grant permission to have my comments included in any archiving of
    Groklaw for the Library of Congress, and that includes for access by the general
    public.

    I'd also go on record now to say that, seven long years into this saga, we're
    still not done, but I hope that SCOG is finally, at some point in the near
    future, completely put out of our misery.

    ---
    March 23, 2010 - Judgement day.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Zak3056 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:27 PM EDT
    Definitely, yes, comments included.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: hexdump on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:40 PM EDT
    Yes, by all means. (Not that I personally contributed much...)
    I'd suggest available to everyone, otherwise what's the point?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: nicholasperez on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:41 PM EDT
    You have my permission to my comments. Please let them include everything.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    If SCO has taught us anything...
    Authored by: Zarkov on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:45 PM EDT
    ... it's that every comment counts, and nothing should ever be discarded...

    Giving the Lubrary of Congress access to every part of Groklaw to preserve and
    publish in full public view for posterity is therefore the only sensible thing
    to do...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Authors no longer present to consent
    Authored by: Kalak on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:45 PM EDT
    I am glad to give my permission, under the same CC license as PJ's articles.

    As IPs are not displayed on the site, and it says right below this box I'm
    typing in that it will not be made public, publishing IP addresses is
    "right out" for all.

    This discussion brings back memories of is a previous copyright discussion, and
    also that some authors are not here to consent (AllParadox, marbux, and I'm sure
    there are others who have chosen to leave for whatever reasons). It seems unfair
    to publish others' work beyond the scope of Groklaw without consent, and it says
    at the bottom of all pages for as long as I can remember that "Comments are
    owned by the individual posters."

    As much as I'd like to have all of Groklaw be in the Library, it seems that the
    only way to respect everyone's copyright is to have the Library take over
    hosting of Groklaw from ibiblio, which would merely be a change of providers
    (and ibiblio is a digital library, after all)

    ---
    Kalak: I am, and always will be, an idiot.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, Yes, & Yes
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:54 PM EDT
    yes

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: jkates on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:55 PM EDT
    Let Groklaw outlive Darl.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: belzecue on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:56 PM EDT
    Yes for complete archiving.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, Yes, & Yes
    Authored by: enigma_foundry on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 10:56 PM EDT
    I am all for this.

    eee_eff

    ---
    enigma_foundry

    Ask the right questions

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Comments are part of the feedback loop
    Authored by: Peter Baker on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:03 PM EDT
    Permission to use comments confirmed

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: itsnotme on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:14 PM EDT
    Go for it, my comments are all yours.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: ftcsm on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:15 PM EDT
    I really don't think you'll find opposition to let Congress Library archive it
    all, comments included.

    Exception may happen on the side of some not too friendly posts we've seen
    during all this time. Please check the terms of the site about the restrictions
    of use for comments but I really think that if it's exposed on your site, it's
    already exposed to the Internet. So no one can really say "I did not
    authorize" since no one ever said anything on the contrary when they posted
    knowingly that the entire Internet could see the posts. But there can always
    happen the "Streisand Effect" (Slashdot term for the kind of situation
    like Barbra Streisand speech that she tried to withdraw later).

    If you need my permission, granted.

    ---

    ------
    Faith moves mountains but I still prefer dynamite

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes do the archive
    Authored by: meissner on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:17 PM EDT
    I give permission to archive the posts (including ones where I forgot to log on)
    at the Library of Congress.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: mwexler on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:21 PM EDT
    I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public access to
    the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the Library's
    public Web site.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: rkrishnam_can01 on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:27 PM EDT
    Congratulations on this great honor PJ. I certainly would support this with all
    comments, even though I have been mostly a reader of the comments. In addition
    to the articles that you had written, I found most of the comments to be very
    enlightening and educational.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Congratulations PJ
    Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:32 PM EDT
    You deserve this for your vast efforts.

    Very cool. It will outlive SCO and likely also many of us.

    You may include anything I have written here, for what little it's worth. :-)



    ---
    The price of freedom is eternal litigation.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: mrcreosote on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:33 PM EDT
    Yes, comments as well

    ---
    ----------
    mrcreosote

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, everything. And open access please.
    Authored by: NilsR on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:35 PM EDT
    Yes, everything. And open access please.


    ---
    NilsR

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:39 PM EDT
    Short answer: Yes.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: darksepulcher on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:41 PM EDT
    I'm a serial lurker who rarely has anything of substance to contribute, so take
    this one for what it's worth. I'm all in favor of letting them have everything:
    insightful comments, fluff comments, trolls, typos, OT meanderings into deep
    left field, everything. That's part of the true essence of Groklaw. After all,
    what's a beefy steak of substance without a few spices and seasons thrown in for
    flavor? :D

    ---
    Had I but time--As this fell Sergeant, Death
    Is strict in his arrest--O, I could tell you--
    But let it be.
    (Hamlet, Act V Scene 2)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: wood gnome on Tuesday, April 06 2010 @ 11:55 PM EDT
    As this was/is a public forum from the start, I have no objections whatsoever.
    Congrats PJ!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: tbogart on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:00 AM EDT
    Yes, let them have everything. No question.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: SteveJohnson on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:12 AM EDT
    Yes, yes, yes.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: LaGrosse on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:21 AM EDT
    Yes, in toto. Including all the lame comments that I made
    anonymously
    (I just realized that I'm not sure when I found Groklaw.)

    ---
    Registered Linux User #292956
    windows free since 2003

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    YES!
    Authored by: sscherin on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:24 AM EDT
    Do it..

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:28 AM EDT

    It's been a while since I got involved with any of the threads. I do recall mentioning the "Magic Garden" book way back. Probably when Darl was going on about sooper sekrit UNIX methods.

    I can't recall if I ever officially registered as a Groklaw user/member but it's obviously OK with me to include any comments I made over the years.

    So where are you going next, PJ? Software patents? Net Neutrality?

    --
    Rick

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The consensus is clear: Information wants to be free
    Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:55 AM EDT
    Clearly there are very few that want to restrict.

    If no IP addresses are tied to any particular comment
    (which should not be a problem anyway), then it really
    comes down to a very small minority of accounts
    that may not want their comments archived.

    The simple way to deal with that is to allow some time
    for those specific user accounts to contact PJ and
    make their wishes known.

    As to the actual implementation to hide those comments,
    that is another issue. One simple way would be to kill
    the account. A more elegant way would be to allow
    some type of setting on the account, but that leads to
    additional implementation issues that may not be fully
    effective.

    Bottom line, I doubt that there are more than a couple
    of dozen accounts that want their comments hidden.


    ---

    You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Nice Kitty on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:03 AM EDT
    I'm split on this one. Split, that is, between "Yes", and "Heck
    Yes".

    Go for it, PJ.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: brooker on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:11 AM EDT
    Wow! What a wonderful thing for PJ and Groklaw! My vote is absolutely,
    positively, no doubt about it...yes! yes! yes! for everything.

    :o)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes - include all you legally can. For everyone to see.
    Authored by: piskozub on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:26 AM EDT
    After all Groklaw is already on the Internet...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: chad on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:29 AM EDT
    You may have anything I've contributed.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    LOL HI LIBRARY OF CONGRESS!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:57 AM EDT
    PLZ TAKE CARE OF THIS COMMENT, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY!
    :D

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Of Course
    Authored by: Alex on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 02:01 AM EDT
    The Library of Congress can use any/all of my comments, stories, etc.

    Alex

    ---
    Hey Darl!! Did Ross Perot draw your chart?"

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I told you this long ago
    Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 02:09 AM EDT
    Ok, I hate to promote myself (No, I don't), but I told you this long ago, Groklaw needs to be preserved for the future:

    What more contemporay items should be in a museum? The Groklaw servers? Why not?! Preserved for the future!

    At last, I'm recognized! I'm famous! Thanks, congress ;)


    ---
    ______
    IMANAL


    .

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 02:35 AM EDT
    As the dictum in science runs: Publish or perish! And there is no better place
    to publish, so please go ahead, full steam, and submit it all. The fact that you
    ask permission is for me just the ultimate indication that you have created a
    site where a high moral standard is simply to be expected from everyone. This is
    another of your amazing achievements!

    Best,

    stovring

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: wharris on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 02:37 AM EDT
    I vote to put it all in, open to the public.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: n6lv on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:08 AM EDT
    Put it all in. All of it. Warts and all. It's history.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Uh Oh! Darl Alert!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:14 AM EDT
    Do you have the copyrights?

    I would hate to see the LoC dragged through interminable years of legal
    wrangling because 'somebody' might claim the copyrights because 'a part of their
    name' has once touched this web site.

    And then again, maybe that will provide incentive for some much needed reform.
    Legislators! I'm looking at you!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    News Pick Items Comments here
    Authored by: dio gratia on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:26 AM EDT
    Please indicate the News Pick Item in the title

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    YES: Ignore the copyrights of the minority objectors.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:32 AM EDT
    Pfft, laws. What do they matter compared to groupthink?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:54 AM EDT
    I would suggest that the entire website, including comments, be archived by the
    Library of Congress, but stipulate that the only access to comments is via the
    LoC - i.e the robots.txt or other mechanism specifically requires search engines
    to not include the comments. The articles themselves should be open access.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Nonad on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 04:29 AM EDT
    Yes, absolutely you may include what few comments I have made under this incarnation, but even more importantly those many comments made under my earlier ID that you banned, "Tomas"...

    It is nice of you to recognize in these questions exactly what you banned me for saying so long ago.

    As to the actual questions...


    Acceptance to archive Web site

    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to archive the Web site identified above for inclusion in the Library's collection of Web materials."

    Acceptance to provide offsite access

    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the Library's public Web site."


    I fully agree with allowing both.

    Enjoy,
    Tomas

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Suggestion: Add a button in the user profile
    Authored by: Winter on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 04:38 AM EDT
    Would it be possible to add a button/switch in the user profile where registered
    users can opt-in/opt-out to this LoC indexing and distribution?

    If this would be possible, all registered members can be asked to set it in
    their profile. That would help to select all those comments that definitely ARE
    legally indexed and distributed to be extracted automatically.

    The next thing is to determine what the legal status is of the Robots.txt
    exclusion. Can anonymous posters legally rely on this exclusion to protect their
    comments? Or is that exclusion the prerogative of the blog owner and can be
    undone at will?

    Rob

    ---
    Some say the sun rises in the east, some say it rises in the west; the truth
    lies probably somewhere in between.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Acrow Nimh on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 05:06 AM EDT
    Yes to everything... As somebody pointed out earlier, ALL the stuff on this
    website is publically available now anyway, so what difference would it make
    archiving it? (apart from achieving your rightful place in history, PJ!)

    ---
    ISO....If you have the cash, we have the rubber stamp.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes
    Authored by: DrStupid on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 05:55 AM EDT
    I'm happy for all my comments and contributions to be included :)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO will hate this...
    Authored by: DaveJakeman on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 06:05 AM EDT
    ...which is reason enough to do it all on its own.

    I agree that the comments are a vital part of the record. They are also
    available to the public anyway (apart from the members-only articles). To a
    historian, the comments would give wonderful context and side colour. Give
    them.

    Some problems I see:

    1. I don't know how the Library of Congress would take a copy of the comments
    whilst preserving the Geeklog comment structure. The structure of the comments
    is a vital part of being able to understand them. That's not our problem, but
    I'd like to see the comment structure preserved.

    2. There are many, many links to external websites in both the articles and
    comments. Quite a few of these are dead already and the link-rot will only
    continue. This will erode the value of the project over time, but it's well
    worth doing all the same.

    3. As others have pointed out, I'm concerned about the information being
    "preserved" by being locked into a proprietary and possibly
    DRM-protected format, possibly on a pay-to-view basis. You can't make
    information free by locking it up. The one bargaining point Groklaw has is to
    not allow this to go forward unless the information is genuinely made free, as
    well as being preserved for eternity.

    Notwithstanding the above, I say go for it: release in full, to the public.

    Oh, and congratulations!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Davo.Sydney on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 06:19 AM EDT
    I think it's a great that they want to keep a record of Groklaw. :) And the more
    places Groklaw is preserved the better.

    But on the other side of the coin, SCO isn't allowing it's web site to be
    archived on the Wayback Machine. And so for a complete record of what has
    happened, I hope someone somewhere one day is able to give the Library of
    Congress a complete Archive of the SCO web site. So as to complete the picture.

    I'm not sure of the legality of taking a copy of SCO's web site, but I would be
    interested if Novell or IBM or any other company or legal team has in fact
    recorded SCO's web site and press releases etc... and I would be surprised if
    they haven't.

    Davo.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes Everything
    Authored by: TerryC on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 06:27 AM EDT
    Also; a well deserved honour. I'm very pleased for you (and that includes PJ
    and all contributors).

    ---
    Just think; if Microsoft added 'You hereby grant us a license to print money' to
    their EULA, it wouldn't change its meaning a bit.

    Terry

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes!
    Authored by: PeterMan on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 06:42 AM EDT
    I can see no objections.

    Although I only have been lurking the last few years and my posts have been of
    limited significance at best I would consider it a great honor.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: iraskygazer on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 06:47 AM EDT
    Yea!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: JamesK on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 06:58 AM EDT
    I have no problem with my stuff being included. It'd be cool to be referenced
    by the LoC.

    ---
    IANALAIDPOOTV

    (I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    A more fitting epitaph to SCO I can't imagine.
    Authored by: warner on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:45 AM EDT
    Firstly, PJ, you have my permission to use my comments in any way whatsoever.
    Though in the spirit of GL, and FOSS that this community has championed, I hope
    and vote for full inclusion and full public access to be chosen.

    Secondly, I just wanted to say what a delight it has been these last couple
    weeks, seeing both SCO and GL finally reaching the ends they each so rightly
    deserved. Though for GL it's really just a new beginning isn't it? :)

    I am glad I was here at the beginning of this, though my contribution has been
    less than the least.

    It has been a joy to witness you Madam, you and the rest of the GL community.
    What was created here by all is a thing worthy of remembering.

    ---
    free software, for free minds and a free world.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: dodger on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:49 AM EDT
    Groklaw is an honor to democracy and to our country.
    Congratulations to PJ and the community for this great honor.
    Everything should be put there. For posterity.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:55 AM EDT

    I have been lurking daily or almost daily since 2003.

    My very few posts have been anonymous, me being the coward I am.

    Once a post is on the Internet, it is out of control and cannot
    be pushed into its bottle again.

    When asked politely about my posts, I feel flattered and approve,
    knowing very well that my only real option would have been never
    posting them at all.

    However, I have the impression that each post, when received,
    is also accompanied by the IP address of its origin.

    If this is so, I would find it very objectionable if these addresses
    are saved at all and a catastrophy for privacy if they were made
    available for anybody.


    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: reimero on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:00 AM EDT
    Absolutely.

    I work in a law library, and I can see the value in having
    this site archived as both a historical and a legal resource.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes
    Authored by: cjk fossman on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:02 AM EDT
    For whatever they're worth, PJ has my permission to use my comments any way she
    wants.

    I do hope LoC preserves the comment threads.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: growler on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:16 AM EDT
    For completeness sake; I agree fully that Groklaw and all its comments should be
    included. But then again, I have none to very few comments that would be
    archived myself so maybe those that really have been vocal here should get the
    definite say.

    I have a few anon comments posted at various points over the years and for
    those: Permission is hereby granted to PJ in full to do what she sees fit.

    R. Growler.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: sclark46 on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:20 AM EDT
    Yes - all of it to everyone.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: abel on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:22 AM EDT
    I think it would be great to include comments in the library archives. I think
    that peoples feelings and reactions to the events covered here on Groklaw are
    just as relevant as the news itself.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: scav on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:48 AM EDT
    Yes. I think all comments should be archived and made public, and give
    permission for mine, such as they are.

    FWIW, I think trolls should be left in. Maybe future psychologists can make some
    use of them one day.



    ---
    The emperor, even undaunted by the *jury's* ruling that he *really* had no
    clothes, redoubled his siege of Antarctica, to extort tribute from the penguins.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Zodak on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:59 AM EDT
    I'm not sure how enlightening any of my few posts might be, but I'm willing to
    let them be archived.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: Sticky Bits on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:11 AM EDT
    PJ,

    You may allow the Library of Congress to archive any of my posts - whether
    attributed or anonymous - in any way you see fit to do so.

    Congratulations, the accolades are all yours.

    So, when are we going to see you in that red dress? I've been waiting since May
    of 2004!

    R

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: greybeard on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:14 AM EDT
    Yes. To all.

    --gb

    ---
    -greybeard-

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    yes.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:32 AM EDT
    A single, meaningless anonymous comment in 7 years, but yes, you have my
    permission

    -morgajel

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: holdenSK on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:32 AM EDT
    First: Congratulations to PJ for such recognition :)

    Second: I am for archiving site also with comments, and to that effect I hereby
    grant permission to PJ to use any and all comments I posted and/or will post on
    this site for any purpose she deems appropriate and useful :)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Congratulations PJ!
    Authored by: biochem_guy on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:35 AM EDT
    My vote is "Yes everything for everyone".

    Biochem_guy

    ---
    Chemistry is cool!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Come's here, AND in Congress.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:44 AM EDT
    "And we can decide who can access the collection, the public at
    large or just the Congress and on-site researchers and
    historians."

    I certainly expect that the public would be able to access
    this, as the case that started it, has been in the public eye.
    Also the Come's case and exhibits would then be accessible
    elsewhere.
    Include it all (I've posted mostly anonymously), and say it
    needs to be there, AND accessible to the public!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:46 AM EDT
    yes

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 09:49 AM EDT
    Yep, and let them have everything!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Everything currently public for everyone
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 10:02 AM EDT
    I am only an occasional anonymous poster, but here is my take:

    "everything currently public" should exclude logs and private e-mail,
    but otherwise everything now in the public should be archived.

    "for everyone" is important. A key issue of free software is that it
    is non-discriminatory. E.g. the GPL prohibits limitations of usage areas (I
    sometimes wish the GPL would allow such limitations, e.g. no military or no
    nuclear usage, but overall the non-discriminatory clause is the better way).

    Regarding copyright, I don't know US laws and I don't live in the US, but maybe
    someone wants to research the following. Where I live copyright law contains
    specific permissions for the state archive (an organization similar to the LOC),
    to copy stuff, even break copy protection, without the explicit permission of
    the copyright holders. This is to avoid problems if copyright holders can't be
    identified or decryption keys got "lost".

    Maybe the LOC has similar rights, so the discussion about comment copyright is
    mood?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 10:08 AM EDT
    Hey PJ can we meet in person to talk about this.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Fine by me.
    Authored by: jbeale on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 10:22 AM EDT
    You're certainly welcome to include my comments, and I think it should be fine
    to include everyone's comments, the good with the bad.

    I'm a little surprised there should even be a question... doesn't everyone
    assume that everything they write on a public website will be permanently
    archived? given the "wayback machine" etc. ?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes - all for all
    Authored by: Jan on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:22 AM EDT
    Anything else would be a tragedy of sorts.

    Made me figure out my login after gathering dust a few years :-)

    ---
    Non sum iurisconsultus

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: dlapine on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:26 AM EDT
    Yes to All

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: danielpf on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:33 AM EDT
    Yes. No problem.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: clicky_maker on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:36 AM EDT
    Groklaw may do whatever it wishes with the comments of the user
    "clicky_maker".

    ---
    505640

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: dave booth on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:37 AM EDT
    Yes to everything, comments and public access included - Small and inane though
    my contributions may have been over the years.

    Its probably the only chance I'll ever get to have anything I wrote in that
    library anyway :)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:47 AM EDT
    Yes to everything. This has been a lot of work for PJ and some of the rest of
    us. I've never said anything I would worry about being preserved (though
    perhaps some off topic).

    Go for it -- this is far too good to waste, and sets a great example for any
    future efforts.

    One of the things I think many of us don't like about copyright law as it is, is
    the effective loss of our culture due to things being illegal to copy, yet out
    of print -- died on the vine never to return.

    May Groklaw NEVER suffer that fate.

    DougC

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Groklaw should not be archived
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 11:53 AM EDT
    If a requirement for the archival of documents is for a publication to have a
    physical individual responsible for its contents, then Groklaw isn't a good
    candidate.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: cwr2 on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:06 PM EDT
    PJ,

    Groklaw is a wonderful learning resource and historical archive. There is no
    better place to preserve it for the rest of time!

    Congratulations !

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:13 PM EDT
    Yes (for my few comments).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: mdchaney on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 12:14 PM EDT
    Yes! Permission to post my comments.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: cr on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:03 PM EDT

    I think it's important that the comments streams be included in what's archived and made available. Groklaw is more than a record of SCO v. world: it's an instantiation of the open-source approach to something beyond direct technology. Being able to see everything that went on, in context, is important, both to sociologists and others seeking to understand "this is pivotal stuff -- just what happened here?", and to social activists seeking to understand "look, this worked -- how do we make it happen again?" In fact, if someone can scare up logs of the unofficial IRC channel, those should be included as well as further context.

    I hereby assign copyright on my few very minor comments/contributions to PJ and the Groklaw team for such archival purposes and any other uses they might find for them.

    ---
    GROKLAW: "And I would have gotten away with it, too, if not for you meddling kids!"

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    retroactivity and fair use
    Authored by: IANALitj on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:12 PM EDT
    This is not a formal opinion, just a pair of guesses.

    If Groklaw does get archived by the LOC, prospective posters can be warned by a
    notice to that effect, with an explicit grant of permission by those posting.

    Several people have pointed out that there might conceivably be a problem with
    getting permission from those who have posted in the past. Some of them are
    anonymous; some may be dead.

    As so often happens, there is a choice of law issue to contend with as a
    preliminary matter. My first guess is that U. S. law applies.

    My second guess is that the U. S. law of fair use may cover the matter,
    considering (among other factors) the research use to which the copying will be
    put, the purpose of the site to which the posters added their contributions, and
    how small each posting is in comparison to the total mass to which those posting
    knowingly made their additions.

    There may be those who are in a better position to judge the applicability of
    the fair use provisions of U. S. law than the LOC, but there can't be very many
    (outside of the courts, of course, who have the final say).

    Moreover, it is the LOC who would be doing the copying (and thus presumably the
    infringing). In this connection, PJ might well wish to put in some weasel
    wording in the permission she gives, in which she disclaims any responsibility
    for copyright infringement by the LOC or those farther downstream.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Important Documents
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:32 PM EDT
    Groklaw.net has some important documents referencing Micro$oft that seem to keep
    disappearing from the web. To have those backed up by the federal government as
    a permanent reference would be ideal.

    The comments are integral to a blog. The articles are shaped by the comments
    that came before. It helps to have those comments in the record to make it
    easier to follow a thread of discussion. (Kind of like the
    "Connections" shows.)

    It is a pity that the troll postings are not available. Having that kind of
    historical background is valuable, if only in a negative way. The trolls are
    mentioned with some frequency, but we don't see the vitriol that they actually
    spew. I think that is a loss for history, even if it is good for our blood
    pressure.

    -- Alma

    (I hardly ever post, and only anonymously, for job search purposes, but you are
    welcome to anything I have ever contributed.)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: prmills@earthlin on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 01:49 PM EDT
    Yes for everything.

    I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to archive the Web site
    identified above for inclusion in the Library's collection of Web materials.

    I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public access to

    the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the Library's

    public Web site.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, and might the LoC have limited rights anyway?
    Authored by: uw_dwarf on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 02:11 PM EDT
    I'm in favour of seeing things archived at the LoC. I wonder, though, if
    permission isn't needed for the LoC to have a copy under something like a
    variation on a legal deposit requirement.

    That leaves terms of access as the only issue in my mind, and given that
    Groklaw is on the public Internet, comments are already about as open as they
    can be.

    The first thing I'd withhold is membership profile information for the writers
    of
    the attributed comments.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Rubberman on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 02:11 PM EDT
    Assuming that the answer to the question "What can it hurt?" is
    "Not much.", then I vote yes.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: ausage on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:08 PM EDT
    For myself... I hereby grant permission and license to
    Growlaw to publish and repulibsh this comment and any others
    that I have made or will in future make on its website and
    any archive, partial or complete copies of the Groklaw
    website.

    IANAL, but my take on this is that, much the same as when I
    write a "letter to the editor" to my local newspaper, by
    submitting a comment to Groklaw or any other interactive
    website, I am granting an implicit licence of that website
    to publish my comment. This would include the both the
    original website and any copies that may be made.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: wood gnome on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:21 PM EDT
    Just a couple of things that popped up in my mind:
    1. I'd be interested to know just who managed to get this up into the LoC
    deciding chain.
    2. PJ, will you have a say in what category they'll put Groklaw? IP? Legal
    Ethics? Tech & Law? Your personal preference?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: uiLKK4 on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:34 PM EDT
    "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public
    access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the
    Library's public Web site."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    YES
    Authored by: softbear on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 03:38 PM EDT
    The good, the bad, and the ugly.

    I am confident the a static archive of the site, in the hands of the LOC can
    only be a good thing.



    ---
    IANAL, etc.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: bhaskar on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 04:08 PM EDT
    My vote is for all content, including comments, to be made
    available to LOC and freely accessible to all. The content
    of Groklaw is priceless and it is appropriate for an
    organization such as LOC to preserve it for posterity.

    My vote also extends to future requests from other
    organizations with a similar mission of learning (e.g., if
    the British Museum were to ask).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    It's definitely cheaper than that "name a star" scam
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 04:55 PM EDT

    For awhile it seemed like every Christmas there were advertisements for
    "name a star" where you could pay $$ and
    they would name a star after the person of your choice. You would get a paper
    certificate, and they would put their "star registry" in the Library
    of Congress.

    So here you go. Just post a post with your name on it and you will be in the
    Library of Congress. Print yourself a certificate and you are in business.

    I hereby give the official alias "Anonymous" to that star also known
    as Polaris.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 05:13 PM EDT
    Groklaw.net will be one of the most researched sites for
    future technology historians.

    And PJ, in spite of you statements about what others have done
    for Groklaw, you and you alone are the CIO here.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, very much so...
    Authored by: Jamis on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:12 PM EDT
    I believe that Groklaw should be archived in its entirety. I think any attempt
    to partition it would eventually leave a void somewhere. Let the future
    determine what is relevant or not. This is a great complement to the Groklaw
    community and the person who started it all.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    YES - this is a blog
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:20 PM EDT
    You should do both, but if enough people object then withhold the comments.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Groo on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:37 PM EDT
    I give PJ the right to do whatever she would like with my comments posted on
    Groklaw for personal, public, and even commercial use. Enjoy.

    -Charlie

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes, and further:
    Authored by: PTrenholme on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 07:53 PM EDT

    I hereby grant PJ license to use any materiel I submit (at any time) to her blog, "Groklaw," in any way she sees fit, including removal of any implied or actual copyright I have in any such postings.

    If that's not clear, PJ, you or anyone you designate, can do anything you want to do with anything I've ever posted, or will ever post, in the Groklaw blog.

    ---
    IANAL, just a retired statistician

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Col
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 07 2010 @ 08:39 PM EDT

    In the spirit of Open Source and democracy, let Groklaw be included in the Library of Congress archive, to be accessible to everyone. As we all know, and as you have so elegantly demonstrated, when knowledge is free and open, our freedom as a people and as a nation remains strong.

    Al Butler
    Custom Desktop Solutions

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yes - Archive everything
    Authored by: kss18 on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 12:48 AM EDT
    Yes, absolutely. Every last bit of data should be preserved.

    krishna

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 01:47 AM EDT
    Of course you can use them! If I'd have know the LoC wanted them, I wouldn't
    have posted them anonymously from the office.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
    Authored by: dobbo on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 02:58 AM EDT

    I would have and issue if any government agency (or anyone at all for that matter) were to archive my copyrighted material and then restrict who had access to it.

    So long as their are no restrictions placed on who has access to the material then I have no objections to this.

    Dobbo

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Aye but where are the nays?
    Authored by: Alan(UK) on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 06:38 AM EDT
    Congratulations.

    Yes, you may include my comments both signed and anonymous.

    Yes, include everything that is currently accessible.

    Do not include anything deleted. Groklaw is noted for not including bad
    language, trolls, and links to porn sites. If the LoC wants examples of those,
    it has the rest of the Internet to go at.

    Groklaw would not be possible without the Internet. Any restriction on access is
    totally opposite to the concepts of freedom and openness enshrined in FOSS, the
    GPL, GNU/Linux, and Groklaw. The only secrets we have are private: addresses,
    e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, IP addresses; and PJ's identity.

    But where are the opposition? A 'no' thread, a few trollish remarks, not much
    else. Where are the real opposition? I mean, the people who really don't want
    Groklaw to be widely read? People like:

    Microsoft and its senior management and partners.

    ISO and those who enabled ISO/IEC 29500 to be accepted.

    AT&T and the Regents of California University whose sealed agreement has
    been published on Groklaw.

    And of course our old fiend Darl McBride and NewSCO.

    It is amazing how many slimy things go scurrying for shelter when you turn over
    a stone. If this is the last post on Groklaw and if the files are wiped clean,
    know this, the world will never be the same again. Thanks PJ.

    ---
    Microsoft is nailing up its own coffin from the inside.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 07:23 AM EDT
      Yes and it needs to be everything so folks have an accurate picture!

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: eibhear on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 08:29 AM EDT
      Hi PJ,

      Congratulations on the validation you and Groklaw have received with this
      request.

      I stopped commenting a long time ago, and such as they are, but I hereby give
      permission for all of the comments I have made -- and will make -- on Groklaw to
      be archived by the US Library of Congress.

      Well done,

      Éibhear

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes, all of it
      Authored by: markhb on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 08:40 AM EDT
      It's been a while since I posted anything of substance, but you're welcome to
      archive anything with my name on it.

      ---
      IANAL, but ITRYINGTOCHILLOUT... et SCO delenda est!

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: ak_hepcat on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 11:57 AM EDT
      I don't think I've commented much since 2003... but in any case, if I did:

      "I hereby grant permission to the Library of Congress to provide public
      access to the archived versions of my website to researchers and patrons via the
      Library's public Web site."

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes
      Authored by: troll on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 11:59 AM EDT
      Yes. The groklaw should be archived in its entirety.
      Including comments.
      Even comments made by Trolls.

      Yours truly ...

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes...
      Authored by: hawken on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 01:36 PM EDT
      ...with warts and all.. :)

      ---
      Linux user since 1998
      Registered Linux user #207629

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes yes yes yes!
      Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 05:53 PM EDT
      What an amazing offer! Groklaw is truly important as one of the first
      collaborative efforts at defending something from an unjust legal attack by
      leveraging the power of the internet. It is of immense historical value and
      should
      be preserved.

      Joel

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: pdp on Thursday, April 08 2010 @ 07:19 PM EDT
      YES,
      with full Public Access to everyone.


      ---
      (defvar MyComputer '((OS ."GNU/Emacs") (IPL ."GNU/Linux")))
      1st Law of dissuasion of criminal intent : Present a gun !

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes - everything!
      Authored by: chris_bloke on Friday, April 09 2010 @ 05:54 AM EDT
      I'm more than happy for it all to get archived.

      Hopefully in a future proof technology!

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 09 2010 @ 06:23 PM EDT
      Yes.

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: ewe2 on Saturday, April 10 2010 @ 12:45 PM EDT
      Indeed, the collaborative work done on Unix sourcecode alone is worth a study in
      itself. Those who would lock up history for financial gain need to be countered
      by such knowledge, and the process needs to be preserved for future
      understanding. Put it all up.

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: odysseus on Saturday, April 10 2010 @ 05:16 PM EDT
      Bit late to the party, I've been down a trench digging up Roman ruins for the
      last two weeks...

      Anyway, putting on my sometimes historian & archaeologists hats, I say go
      for the full Monty and put everything in LoC with full public access.

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: john82a on Monday, April 12 2010 @ 04:00 PM EDT
      I haven't posted much anyway, and probably nothing in the
      past couple of years even, but having joined a few months
      after you started, I am more than happy to add a yes to
      Groklaw's inclusion in this project.

      I do think the comments were a very great part of my
      interest in the site, and I believe I learned a lot, not
      just about the law or history of computing, but also about
      the community at large and the very generous spirits of all
      the contributors. Not having been a close participant in the
      past few years was certainly my loss.

      john hinton

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes please
      Authored by: Sean DALY on Thursday, April 15 2010 @ 03:15 AM EDT
      Yes for our interviews and my comments!
      Sean

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Yes
      Authored by: hanzie on Sunday, April 18 2010 @ 04:27 PM EDT
      I am proud and humble. Proud that I had at least a microscopic part in Groklaw.

      I am humble because I realize how utterly tiny that part was.

      Congratulations PJ. A heartfelt YES to your question.

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Do You Want Groklaw to Be Included in the Library of Congress's Historic Internet Materials Collections?
      Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 19 2010 @ 11:57 AM EDT
      Absolutely. Give them everything. This site is a stellar example of a lot of
      things, all of which I'm sure future folks will want/need access to.

      [ Reply to This | # ]

      Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
      All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
      Comments are owned by the individual posters.

      PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )