a) The application process must prominently display and clearly communicate the Reserved Names list so that TLD applicants are fully aware of its existence and implications prior to filing its choice of the TLD string. 

b) That Org should contact the relevant protected organizations after String Confirmation Day to ensure they are aware of any applied-for strings that could be considered confusingly similar to those on the Reserved Names list, and are aware of their options for bringing formal Objection or seeking support of the GAC.

c) That Org should also contact the GAC after String Confirmation Day to ensure that the GAC are aware of any applied-for strings that could be considered confusingly similar to those on the Reserved Names list, in order that GAC members may consider whether any Early Warning(s) or GAC Consensus Advice would be appropriate.

In addition, the existing draft language does not quote the Motion correctly in that it says the GAC and relevant protected organizations will be notified of "the applied-for strings" and does not say that they will be notified of the "relevant" applied for strings.  

Bottom line - the best approach for Council in this response is to state that the Council has supplied the requested interpretation of the policy intent and has also confirmed its agreement to additional notification procedures as suggested by the Board as reflected in the Motion that passed (LINK MOTION) in the Council's November meeting.

Thank you,

Anne