Revision as of 14:52, 23 March 2009 by Cducruet (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Nominations to Run for the Board of Directors

According to the Bylaws, nominees for the Board of Directors must either be a current member of an FC chapter or currently serving on the Board.

Reminder, nominations close at Midnight PDT on March 20, 2009.

How to nominate someone

  1. Contact that person.
  2. Edit this page and copy-paste the template below.
  3. Complete the information to reflect your nominee.

What to do if you are nominated

  1. Wait for your sponsor to add you to this page.
  2. Update the Bio and Statement sections below your name.

List of Nominees

(in alphabetical order, by last name)

Donovan, Kevin, Georgetown Free Culture

  • Nominated by Elizabeth Stark

Nomination accepted.



Ducruet, Christina, Current SFC Board member

  • Nominated by Kevin Driscoll


Nomination Accepted


Driscoll, Kevin, Current SFC Board member / MIT Free Culture

  • Nominated by Christina Ducruet



Higgins, Parker, Free Culture @ NYU

  • Nominated by Fred Benenson

Nomination accepted.



Moskowitz, Ben, SFC@Berkeley

  • Nominated by Alex Kozak

Nomination accepted.


While studying Political Science and Critical Theory at UC Berkeley, I co-founded the SFC@Berkeley chapter of Students for Free Culture and helped build important connections between Bay Area public interest groups. I also co-organized the Free Culture 2008 Conference, a two-day event to bring together leading voices in technology policy and campus activism to articulate a national agenda for SFC (videos available here).

In response to a spike in P2P lawsuits on the Berkeley campus, I also created and taught a seminar at Berkeley's iSchool on the cultural dimensions of piracy and convened a lecture series with guests from EFF and Internet Archive. In addition to my work on FC issues, I served as a volunteer teacher at California's San Quentin State Prison, helping prisoners attain high school equivalency certificates.

I'm currently coordinating the Open Video Conference in NYC, a broad effort to democratize and decentralize online video. I'm also a student of Mandarin at NYU SCPS. 你讲中文? Follow me @benrito.


Priorities, briefly:

1. Develop the Open University campaign, culminating in a media unveiling at Free Culture 2009/2010 Conference in Washington, D.C.

2. Improve communications and coordination between chapters

3. Make the organization less intimidating for newcomers


SFC grew from a dedicated corps of hacker-libertarians to a broad movement because of gift from the RIAA: the copyfight. The p2p lawsuits initiated by Big Music have probably attracted more people to our movement than any other single factor.

Today—thanks to our efforts, and also to the basic nature of the internet—the copyfight is winning itself. While there are still huge advances to be made in some areas (fair use exemptions, stopping DMCA abuse), we've hit critical mass. Remix culture is here to stay, and sharing and participating in the formation of culture is now something most of us do without even thinking. That's because some of the basic ideas behind Free Culture—remix, sharing, participation—have percolated into the public consciousness.

This doesn't mean we should abandon the copyfight—we're just now running our victory laps! But to put things in perspective, consider that last year marked the 10th anniversary of the DMCA. To remain fresh and relevant, we'll need to refocus our energies. We'll need to return the organization to something closer to its original mission: ensuring that technology empowers individuals and protecting software freedom. Our mission is to ensure that technology continues to serve the public interest.

The Open University campaign conceived at the FC2008 Conference gives us a great new roadmap. If you haven't familiarized yourself with OU, you should have a look. We now have five pillars for change, and we're focused on where we can be most powerful: the university. Individual chapters can keep on doing what they do best, and the national movement will be energized with a guiding purpose.

One of the ideas behind Open University is that we'll create a set of criteria for judging universities on how open they are, then issue public report cards. These report cards would comprise a comprehensive evaluation of how friendly schools are to F/OSS, how thoroughly they embrace open access publishing, how resistant they are to filtering, etc. I think we should make the OU report cards the central part of our next conference, and that this conference should take place in Washington, D.C. Convening the conference in D.C. will give us a national platform for our message and close proximity to lawmakers.

As a board member I'd build partnerships with FC-friendly organizations operating on the Hill—organizations like New America, Public Knowledge, EFF, UAEM, and the ACLU. We'd see to it that the conference is televised and covered by traditional media, because we can still make believers out of social-justice oriented people who aren't geeks. We'll approach this campaign in the most mainstream and inviting way possible: Open University will be the new public face of SFC. It's important going forward that we see ourselves as a social-justice oriented organization, and not merely advocates for open source software.

If we're successful, the idea of an Open University will percolate into popular consciousness—just like remix culture and participatory media did. Someday, people will come to expect that their universities are open. Harvard already makes its open access policy a point of pride; MIT is sure to follow suit.

With enough lead time and foresight, I'm confident we can pull this off.

The first step is already underway: several chapters have begun the necessary research to create grading guidelines. But we have a long way to go. This project will require a lot of active coordination from the board, and perhaps the energy of a dedicated coordinator. What's less important than how we choose to organize ourselves is that we take initiative. One thing that has become apparent is that talking about how to organize ourselves hasn't gotten us anywhere.

With SFC, less is more. We don't need an elaborate organizational structure. What we need is wide-open channels of communication and medium-term goals. I've laid out a vision to get us going, but I'm interested in hearing your suggestions. What does SFC need to be effective? Let me know what you think! benrito at geemail

Owens III, Clifford Conley, Free Culture at Virginia Tech

  • Nominated by Joel Alejandre

Nomination accepted.


When I was born, my mother told the doctors to take me away because she thought I was an alien. Perhaps she was right?


I am a better candidate than my competition. You will be happier if you vote for me.

Pavlosky, Nelson, Free Culture George Mason

  • Nominated by himself

Nomination accepted, naturally.



A man can't just sit around! It's time to get excited and make things :)

Phinney, Parker, Dartmouth Free Culture

  • Nominated by Elizabeth Stark

Nomination accepted



Questions, Thoughts, Concerns

This is a space for any FC member to post thoughts to provoke and guide the statements of board nominees.

  • How will can we improve communication among the various chapters?
  • What is something specific we can do to better support and encourage new chapters?
  • How can we improve our current tools?
  • What progress will you make on the Open University campaign?

Past Nominations