WSFS Mark Protection Committee Election at A4

[kevin_standlee]

If you have no interest in the political workings of the Worldcon and the World Science Fiction Society, you can skip this message, I think.

Background

The Mark Protection Committee (MPC) of the World Science Fiction Society is the only permanent body of WSFS. Its main job is to serve as the guardian and registrar of WSFS's intellectual property, including the service marks on "Worldcon," "Hugo Award," etc. It also is responsible for the WSFS web sites (not those of individual Worldcons). A few years ago, the MPC set up what is currently called the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee to concentrate on promotion of the Hugo Awards. Out of that came the Hugo Awards Web Site and the contest last year that led to the adoption of an Official Hugo Awards Logo. I'm currently Chairman of the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee, and I have been Chairman of the MPC at times during the past few years, although I am not MPC Chair this year because there were some concerns voiced about having the same person chairing the HAMC and the MPC at the same time, as I had done in 2008-9.

The membership of the MPC consists of appointees from the currently seated and previous two years' WSFS-sanctioned conventions (Worldcons and NASFiCs), and nine elected members, serving three year terms, with staggered elections so that three members are elected each year. Elections are held at the WSFS Business Meeting at each Worldcon. Nominations are entered at the Preliminary Business Meeting (usually on the second day of the convention). Elections are at the first Main Business Meeting (usually on the third day). Nominations and voting are in person only. No proxy voting or voting by mail or other remote means is allowed.

For the past several years, elections to the WSFS Mark Protection Committee have been of almost no interest to the Business Meeting, with several cases of the incumbents being re-elected without opposition or debate. This has apparently led some people to grumble that the Committee has not been properly engaged, and that it is somehow not representative of the policies of WSFS as expressed through the Business Meeting. I intend to change that this year, as one election, at least, will be a specific policy statement.

Election Manifesto

I am one of the three people (the others are Tim Illingworth and Ben Yalow; Kent Bloom's appointment from Denvention 3 also expires) whose terms on the MPC end this year and whose seats are thus up for re-election. For the record, I am a candidate for re-election to the MPC. If I am re-elected to the MPC, I plan to stand for Chairman. If re-elected, I expect to re-appoint the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee as it currently stands possibly plus other persons yet to be identified.

In short, I intend to have my re-election to the MPC serve as a referendum on the accomplishments of the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee and upon the way it has been run and how the MPC was managed during the several years I was Chairman. (I did not chair the MPC this past year, but did so for several years prior to that.) Given my own commitments to a democratically-run organization and to openness in the governance of WSFS, I do not want to be accused of operating in the shadows without oversight. I am aware that not everyone is happy with the direction that WSFS has taken with the promotion of the Hugo Awards through TheHugoAwards.org and through the adoption of an official logo, and that there are members of WSFS who think that the current course of action is too "activist" and that all Hugo promotion should and must be solely run by individual Worldcon committees with no central involvement whatsoever. Therefore, I want to give WSFS, though its own processes, an opportunity to publicly decide whether the members want a relatively activist leadership or to return to an era of quiet neglect of its intellectual property.

In this past year, the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee has recommended that the MPC undertake the registration of additional marks: the distinctive design of the Hugo Awards trophy as an award for science fiction and fantasy, and the Hugo Award logo unveiled last year. The MPC has taken no action on this. If I am re-elected, I intend to re-introduce the subject in the coming year and make more of an effort to get a decision rather than simply inaction.

Policy Referendum

I'm saying that if you think that the actions with which I was associated were the right ones, then vote for me, because if you do, you can expect more of the same, and if not, support other candidates who will take WSFS in the direction you consider more appropriate. I'm freely willing to admit that I might be wrong and that the only appropriate method of promoting the Hugo Awards is through the individual uncoordinated actions of specific Worldcon committees, and if the democratically-expressed will of the membership is against me on this issue, then so be it.

If you are attending Aussiecon 4, I hope you will take the opportunity to attend the WSFS Business Meetings and participate in the society's open "town meeting" democracy. The whole thing may seem a little esoteric or boring, but policy decisions established here can have major effects upon Worldcon, so I think it is important than the members actively represent themselves here.

Comments

[redneckotaku.livejournal.com]

My opinion is that you are trying to advance the Hugo's Brand and that you should get voted in rather easily. I think the "conservatives" are a much smaller group than you think, but also a much louder group. I really hope it is an easy re-election for you.

[kproche.livejournal.com]

Alas, as you know, we won't be at Aussiecon 4, because if we were, I'd brave the peril that is the Business Meeting to be sure to cast my vote for you.

I think you are bang on with what you've been doing, and wholeheartedly support it!

[fjm.livejournal.com]

Wish I was there, but think what you are doing eminently sensible in this commercial world.

[yourbob.livejournal.com]

Like others, I won't be there this year, but would support you wholeheartedly.

[desperance.livejournal.com]

I just found out today that I won't be there, spit curse; but for what it's worth, your work on these issues has my absolute support.

[buddykat.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I won't be there this year; otherwise, you'd have my vote.

[cmdrsuzdal.livejournal.com]

I adore what has been done in recent years to promote the Hugos, and think the numbers speak for themselves.

Unfortunately I won't be at Aussiecon, and I know there is no way to vote by proxy, but you can rest assured if I were there you would have my vote. Wish it were Reno.

[alycon.livejournal.com]

I'll be at Aussiecon. Just remind me when to show up, a little closer to the convention.

[netmouse.livejournal.com]

I think the Hugo Logo and thehugoawards.org are fabulous, and I am also curious as to what you think "more of the same" might look like in the next three years.

Unfortunately I will not be there, but I'd vote for you if I was.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

By "more of the same," I mean that we'll do things like apply for registration, do more promotion, and be more active in working to get people to use the logo. We'll work with Worldcon committees to leverage their resources with the shared knowledge of the HAMC. No, I don't have much firmer plans that that, but at the very least we need to get the service marks registered for our protection.

[netmouse.livejournal.com]

! we have a Mark Protection committee, but the Hugo Award is not a registered mark?

Or do you mean the logo?

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

I mean the logo and also the design of the Hugo Award trophy rocket. The "word marks" ("Hugo Award," "Worldcon," "World Science Fiction Convention," "WSFS," "World Science Fiction Society," and "NASFiC") are all registered in the USA. Some of the word marks are also registered in the UK and Australia.

Referendum

[glenn-glazer.livejournal.com]

IMHO you are taking the opinion of one or two irritants too personally and that most people (self included) think you are doing a fine job.

Re: Referendum

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

While the number of said irritants may be small, their influence is disproportionately large and they are in a position where they have been able to block all action by making plausible arguments. As with the proposal on electronic voting, I'm moving to removed the "plausible" part from their arguments.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd vote for you if I could, but Australia is too far and too expensive for me. I hope that one day the meetings will be viewable electronically, and voteable as well, because this is economic disenfranchisement.

G
http://bigappletobigbear.blogspot.com

Econcomic Disenfranchisement

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm not undertaking to change the basic governance structure of WSFS. Ever since the current form of the organization stabilized in the early 1970s (and long before widespread internet connectivity and web access), the governance of the organization has always been vested in the Business Meeting. That's why changes to the constitution require votes at two consecutive Worldcons.

I don't see WSFS changing to a system of holding its meetings online anytime soon. A more likely (but still low probability) change would be for ratification to be by ballot of the following years' members, rather than by vote at the Business Meeting. That would allow supporting members to vote as well, just as they can currently vote on the Hugo Awards and Site Selection.

Agreed

[gary-farber.livejournal.com]

My agreement might hinder more than help, but your platform seems perfectly sensible and agreeable to me.