Dear
Mr. Neil Dundas plus other interested interlocutors gathered in this forum;
There
is no argument regarding whether .Africa (DotAfrica) is a geographic name gTLD
or not. Everyone knows that a gTLD application for the ‘Africa’ geographic name
will be treated by the ICANN Evaluation as a geographic gTLD application. The
new gTLD guidebook requirements and stipulations are quite clear regarding how
geographic TLDs will be evaluated, and DCA Trust therefore expects its
application for the ‘Africa’ geographic name string to be evaluated
accordingly. The issue of ‘.Africa’, ‘DotAfrica’, or ‘DotdotAfrica’, is actually
immaterial because the matter was immediately brought to the attention of ICANN
in June, and we expect that the string name issue will be sorted out
very soon based on ICANN’s acknowledgement and confirmation of the report made
by DCA Trust.
 |
DCA’s Commentary on ITWebAfrica Story
|
However,
Mr. Neil Dundas has spent a lot of time trying to explain that .Africa is by
definition, only a geographic TLD. Neil Dundas has deliberately tried to
avoid providing the pertinent clarification that was required of him to explain
why his organization, having received support to apply on behalf of the African
Community, failed to submit a Community TLD application based on its answers to
ICANN Evaluation Question Numbers 19 and 20. DCA Trust
has already articulated the issues clearly enough in its initial posting, and
there is no need to restate the facts of the matter for anyone’s benefit. One
early contributor had also asked UniForum to clarify for the interest of the
community, but this request was intentionally ignored.
We
believe that it is also important for everyone to know that a Geographic name
string could also be a Community name string. In other words, the same TLD can
be considered both ‘Geographic’ and ‘Community’ at the same time. For
instance, there were a total of eleven (11)
Geographic Names that were applied for as Community-based strings in this
current round. (See for example, http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/statistics) We believe this is what the African
Union Commission and its Task Force advisers probably had in mind when they
unambiguously stated inter alia in their RFP document (to select
a registry operator for DotAfrica): “the winning bidder should bear in mind
that “this is a geographical TLD which should be run on behalf of the
community”, and “Collaborate with the Internet community on the project”
and “Lead the effort to create an active domain name community in Africa”
.http://www.au.int/en/content/request-proposals-african-union-commission-operation-dot-africa
Moreover,
the Community TLD designs on DotAfrica have always been evident. For example, Nii
Quaynor, a self-appointed African Internet Community leader who is active in
this forum, and one of the most unrepentant arch-opponents of DCA and the chief
architect of the ‘AU leadership and ownership of DotAfrica’ paradigm had
written in a public email: “I think its more responsible for the regional
organization (AUC) to hold the string in public trust and have policy
oversight, especially so with these likes of practices of DCA. This has been
what the African community has helped to achieve.”
Thus,
from both the AU RFP document and the above statement that has been attributed
to Nii Quaynor, who was also a member of the AU Task Force on DotAfrica, we can
tell that the African Community has been led to believe that it can
exercise both ownership and leadership of DotAfrica as a community-owned gTLD
string, and that the appointed registry operator can run the geographic
TLD on behalf of the community. Therefore Neil Dundas’ attempt to insist
that DotAfrica is only a geographic TLD is clearly inconsistent with the AU’s
position and the position that was earlier advanced (either rightly or wrongly)
by Dr. Nii Quaynor regarding what he believes the African Community has helped
to achieve.
It
is obvious that UniForum is the principal beneficiary as a recipient of a
Community TLD endorsement for a geographic name string that it was supposed to
apply for on behalf of the African Community, but now insists that .Africa
is a geographic TLD only and not a Community TLD. If it is not a Community TLD
why did the AU and Dr. Nii Quaynor adopt their positions regarding Community
leadership and ownership of DotAfrica? If DotAfrica is not a Community TLD, why
the overt Community interest in owning it; or the Community clearly insisting
that the geographic TLD must be “run on behalf of the community”,
apparently for its sole benefit?
Neil
Duncan Dundas, who now speaks for UniForum (as the principal applicant contact)
and ‘Africa In One Space’ cannot claim to be ignorant of the above
antecedents. For reasons best known to you, you have clearly elected to
characterize your application as not for any Community, the African Community
included, even though you continue to insist on having the support of the
African Community for this non-Community TLD application that you have
presently submitted. Leaving aside for a minute, the manifest incongruity of
UniForum’s application “not being designated as a Community TLD application,
but having Community support because the resulting TLD must be run on behalf of
the Community”, there are two possible conclusions that could be immediately
drawn:
(1) either the Community is wrong for thinking that it can
legally own a geographic TLD because the selected registry operator has been
asked to run it on behalf of the Community; or,
(2) UniForum, by not submitting a Community TLD application
on behalf of the Community as it was supposed to (or as was expected of it),
has attempted to cheat the Community by committing an outright fraud. Whatever
conclusion is drawn, the purported endorsement of UniForum as the selected
applicant on behalf of the African Community can no longer remain valid after
the fact. If the Community is wrong by getting the AU to select a registry
operator for a geographic TLD that must be “run on behalf of the community”
the purported endorsement cannot remain legitimate, and in similar manner, if
UniForum has been fraudulent, this should legally invalidate the purported
endorsement that it received.
The
truth of the matter as we know it is that UniForum received a letter of
appointment (either equivalent to, or substituting for an endorsement) from the
AU Commission to apply for a geographic TLD on behalf of the African Community.
The AU Communiqué on DotAfrica that was published around the 29th of
March 2012 is very unambiguous to the extent that it unmistakably mentions: “the
AU Commission selected UniForum SA (the ZA Central Registry Operator or ZACR),
to administer and operate dotAfrica gTLD on behalf of the African community.”
The same Communiqué also indicated that: “Shortly after its appointment,
the ZACR, in consultation with Internet Community representatives from all over
Africa, at a meeting held in Johannesburg, established a Steering Committee to
exercise moral and ethical oversight over the dotAfrica project.
Representatives of the broader African Internet community are currently
participating in the project through the Steering Committee and which comprises
African Internet experts, Country Code managers, Registrars and others
volunteering for a better Internet for Africa.” http://www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/AUC-dotAfrica-Communique-.pdf
No
one is fooled: The AU Commission appointed UniForum to apply on behalf of
the African Community, and as soon as it received the appointment,
UniForum had consulted with the Internet Community regarding their involvement
and participation, so this has community written all over it, even though
the only thing now missing is an actual Community TLD application which
UniForum did not submit to ICANN on behalf of the African Community.
Like
they say, if it swims like a duck, quacks like a duck and behaves like a duck,
chances are that it is a duck. Simply trying to explain it away as not a duck,
but a water-bird will not suffice.
Now,
the crux of the matter is that UniForum has not submitted any application on
behalf of the African Community, but keeps insisting that it has community
support even though such support has been clearly nullified by its failure to
submit a DotAfrica application on behalf of the African Community.
This is why we insist that UniForum’s application is absolutely fraudulent, and
if the people in this forum, because of their partisan leanings fail to see it
for what it truly is, perhaps, the ICANN Evaluation will, or perhaps a
competent court somewhere will be able to make the juridical determination that
UniForum’s endorsement is no longer legitimate following their failure to
submit a DotAfrica (DotAfrica) application on behalf of the African Community.
It is quite evident that UniForum has reneged on the understanding that it was
selected to apply on behalf of the African Community and did not make a
Community TLD application as was expected of it, and this needs no further
elaboration. We are quite confident that the necessary legal proofs
can be established in due course, but not in this forum since most people here
are deliberately refusing to admit the truth to themselves.
Finally,
DCA hereby insists that Africa In One Space as a community-defined group whose
interest relates to the ownership of DotAfrica is not a legally registered
organization. We would like to see proof of its establishment, such as
registration papers and other credentials. The registration documents of
UniForum as a legal/corporate entity operating in South Africa cannot serve nor
substitute as the registration documents for Africa In One Space. As Africans,
we must try to ensure that whatever we do should satisfy any form of legal
scrutiny.
DotConnectAfrica.
