>>I have a suggestion for Groklaw. Why not a Google Groklaw? Would it not be wonderful to have legal documents readily available and organized in one place for the general public?<<

Groklaw is available to the general public.  PJ's
decission to stop it from being googled seems trivial
too me.

>>Groklaw more closely resembles the business model of SCO.  Rip off the work of others, lay claim to the contributions of others, and put a lockdown on your precious "intellectual property" so that only you may profit from it.<<

That's just carp.  Day old and smelly.

>>The hypocrisy here is that PJ "licensed" her articles under a non-commercial CCL, but in effect she has locked redistribution of her creative works tighter than RIAA.<<

When you have to resort to lies and exageration to
support your central thesis, you have a problem.
You are free to copy and distribute PJ's works.
But, you knew that.

>>Where would PJ be without the volunteer contributions?  Who would transcribe?  Who would fetch court documents?<<

I think we can safely say that GrokLaw is managing
to limp along without any help from you.