Latest news of the domain name industry

Recent Posts

US judge freezes .africa gTLD

A US court has blocked ICANN from delegating the .africa gTLD for at least another month.

At the request of failed .africa applicant DotConnectAfrica, a California judge handed ICANN a temporary restraining order, enjoining it from “issuing” .africa.

The ruling came two days after the ICANN board of directors voted to allow .africa to be delegated to successful applicant ZACR.

The decision seems to be based on the fact that a delegation is essentially irreversible, so even if DCA were to win the lawsuit it would not be able to get its hands on the gTLD.

“Plaintiff has demonstrated that once the tGLD [sic] is issued, it will be unable to obtain those rights elsewhere,” the judge wrote (pdf).

DCA’s lawsuit, filed despite the that that it waived its right to sue under the new gTLD application agreement, basically makes the same arguments that its successful Independent Review Process made.

The court is due to hold a hearing on April 4 to decide whether ICANN can delegate .africa or will have to wait until the lawsuit is fully resolved.

The company, incidentally, appears to have changed lawyers since its original complaint against ICANN was filed. It’s now with Brown Neri & Smith, having briefly been with Brandon Schantz.

DCA fails .africa evaluation

Kevin Murphy, February 18, 2016, Domain Policy

DotConnectAfrice application for the .africa gTLD has, as expected, failed its ICANN evaluation for want of government support.

The official decision (pdf) was handed down overnight.

According to the Extended Evaluation panel, DCA’s “required documentation of support or non-objection was either not provided or did not meet the criteria”.

In other words, DCA did not have a shred of support for its controversial application.

For gTLDs representing multinational regions, support or non-objection is required from 60% of the governments in that region.

In addition, there cannot be more than one objection from a government in that region.

Not only did DCA not have any support, it also had over a dozen governmental objections.

The company had relied on support letters from the African Union Commission and the UN Economic Commission for Africa, both of which have been retracted.

The AU and most African governments support rival, successful applicant ZACR.

ZACR signed its .africa registry contract with ICANN in March 2014, but its bid has been kept in limbo while DCA has exploited ICANN appeals processes to delay delegation.

Most recently, DCA sued ICANN, despite signing away its right to sue when it applied.

DCA was originally rejected due to Governmental Advisory Committee advice, before it had completed evaluation.

But the company won an Independent Review Process ruling stating that ICANN erred by accepting the advice with no explanation, compelling ICANN to put the DCA application back into evaluation.

After a six-month review, the Geographic Names Panel has now concluded that, duh, nobody supports DCA’s bid.

ICANN has now changed the status of DCA’s application from “Not Approved” to “Will Not Proceed”.

Oddly, and possibly incorrectly, this status cites the GAC advice as the reason for the failure, rather than the fact that DCA failed its evaluation.

Per ICANN practice, no application is truly dead until the applicant withdraws.

DCA sues ICANN for fraud, demands cash

Kevin Murphy, February 3, 2016, Domain Policy

New gTLD applicants may have signed away all their rights to sue ICANN, but that doesn’t seem to be a concern for loose-cannon .dotafrica .africa applicant DotConnectAfrica.

The company has filed suit in California, trying to kill off rival ZACR’s application as “fraudulent” and demanding a load of cash from ICANN.

The suit was filed January 20, and DCA’s request for an emergency restraining order has already been thrown out by the judge.

DCA is basically attempting to re-litigate the Independent Review Process case it won against ICANN last year.

The company claims that ICANN, ZACR, independent evaluator InterConnect Communications, and the Governmental Advisory Committee improperly ganged up on it, in breach of contract.

It also claims fraud, negligence, and a few other alleged violations of the law on the same grounds.

It’s looking for three flavors of monetary damages and “rescission of ICANN’s registry agreement with ZACR as a null and void contract predicated on fraud.”

The IRP panel ruled last year that ICANN breached its bylaws by kicking out DCA’s application based on GAC advice that had not been properly and transparently explained.

The case revealed that ICANN had drafted a letter of support for the African Union Commission to submit in order to show its support for ZACR.

ICANN claims there was nothing improper about that — and the IRP panel did not express an opinion — but it looked pretty dodgy.

The organization says it has not yet been formally served with DCA’s complaint, but told the court that there’s no need for an emergency TRO against .africa being delegated because it’s not an imminent possibility.

Indeed, there’s no danger of ZACR getting .africa live while DCA’s application is undergoing a second round of InterConnect scrutiny for evidence of governmental support (which it does not have).

ICANN added in its filing, almost as an aside, that DCA has signed away its right to sue.

DCA’s new choice of law firm, post-IRP, may be an indication of either the fragile nature of its standing or dwindling cash reserves.

Pricey ICANN-killer Arif Ali is out. Replacing him, a dude who runs a website-free, six-month-old, one-man show from his home in a California cul-de-sac.

Disclosure: DCA thinks I’m a racist, and I think it’s mad. The long, sordid history of the company’s shenanigans can be perused at your leisure with this search.

Africa hands coffin nails to DotConnectAfrica evaluators

Kevin Murphy, October 1, 2015, Domain Policy

The African Union and a United Nations commission have formally told ICANN that they don’t support DotConnectAfrica’s bid for .africa.

When it comes to showing governmental support, a necessity under ICANN’s rules for a geographic gTLD applications, the UN Economic Commission for Africa was DCA’s only prayer.

Company CEO Sophia Bekele had managed to get somebody at UNECA to write a letter supporting .africa back in 2008, and DCA has continued to pretend that the letter was relevant even after the entire continent came out in support of rival applicant ZA Central Registry.

During its Independent Review Process appeal, DCA begged the IRP panel to declare that the 2008 letter showed it had the support of the 60% of African governments that it requires to be approved by ICANN.

The panel naturally declined to take this view.

Now UNECA has said in a letter to the African Union Commission (pdf) dated July 20, which has since been forwarded to ICANN:

ECA as United Nations entity is neither a government nor a public authority and therefore is not qualified to issue a letter of support for a prospective applicant in support of their application. In addition, ECA does not have a mandate represent the views or convey the support or otherwise of African governments in matters relating to application for delegation of the gTLD.

It is ECA’s position that the August 2008 letter to Ms Bekele cannot be properly considered as a “letter of support or endorsement” with the context of ICANN’s requirements and cannot be used as such.

The AUC itself has also now confirmed for the umpteenth time, in a September 29 letter (pdf), that it doesn’t support the DCA bid either. It said:

Any reliance by DCA in its application… proclaiming support or endorsement by the AUC, must be dismissed. The AUC does not support the DCA application and, if any such support was initially provided, it has subsequently been withdrawn with the full knowledge of DCA even prior to the commencement of ICANN’s new gTLD application process.

The AUC went on to say that if DCA is claiming support from any individual African government, such claims should be treated “with the utmost caution and sensitivity”.

That’s because a few years ago African Union member states all signed up to a declaration handing authority over .africa to the AUC.

The AUC ran an open process to find a registry operator. DCA consciously decided to not participate, proclaiming the process corrupt, and ZACR won.

The new letters are relevant because DCA is currently being evaluated for the second time by ICANN’s independent Geographic Names Panel, which has to decide whether DCA has the support of 60% of African governments.

ZACR passed its GNP review largely due to a letter of support from the AUC.

If DCA does not have the same level of support, its application will fail for the second time.

The 2008 UNECA letter was the only thing DCA had left showing any kind of support from any governmental authority.

Now that’s gone, does this mean the DCA application is dead?

No. DCA has a track record of operating irrationally and throwing good money after bad. There’s every chance that when it fails the Geographic Names Review it will simply file another Request for Reconsideration and then another IRP, delaying the delegation of .africa for another year or so.

ICANN finally publishes THAT .africa letter, makes me look like an idiot

Kevin Murphy, September 1, 2015, Domain Policy

ICANN has finally published the letter it controversially drafted for the African Union Commission in order to help it express support for ZA Central Registry’s .africa bid.

Having now read the draft letter for the first time, on balance I’d have to say my previous opinions on its contents were more wrong than right.

The letter was central to claims by rival .africa applicant DotConnectAfrica that ICANN treated ZACR preferentially during the evaluation of both applications.

It was drafted by ICANN staffer Trang Nguyen around June 25, 2013, and sent to ZACR.

It was then edited by ZACR and the AUC, signed by the AUC, and returned to ICANN, whereupon it was forwarded to the new gTLD’s program’s Geographic Names Panel at InterConnect Communications.

The GNP took the letter as an official endorsement of ZACR’s bid, enabling it to pass the Geographic Names Review and proceed to the next stage of the program.

Having seen (and published) the signed AUC letter, I opined here in July that it looked like it had been mostly been written by ZACR and/or the AUC.

I no longer believe that.

It’s now proven that the AUC redraft goes far beyond the “minor edits” that have been claimed by DCA and others — for starters, it’s 40% longer — but a lot of the text that I believed to be ZACR’s work turns out in fact to have come from ICANN.

I’ve put the two letters into a single document (pdf), so you can do a side-by-side comparison if you wish.

There’s still no question that ZACR had African government support for its bid and DCA did not. The dispute centers entirely on whether InterConnect had received expressions of support in the correct format.

An Independent Review Process panel declined to issue an opinion on whether ICANN did anything wrong by drafting the letter, though it is mentioned in its final declaration.

ICANN itself says that it did nothing wrong by drafting the letter, and had DCA had any governmental support it would have done exactly the same thing for it.

The draft letter was among hundreds of pages of documents published last night by ICANN following a Documentary Information Disclosure Process request filed by DI a little over a month ago.