Dear Councilors,

As requested by Heather and Pam (respectively) on the Council call that ended a short while ago, here are the links as well as some explanatory notes from staff (for context) on:

1. The legal basis considered by the Reconvened PDP Working Group on Red Cross Names -

Please see Section 3.1 and Section 5 of the Final Report: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/red-cross-protection-policy-amend-process-final-06aug18-en.pdf. Staff will follow up separately with the NCSG Councilors and Working Group Chair Thomas Rickert to arrange a call between Thomas and interested NCSG members.

2. The policy impact assessment that was done by the IGO-INGO Curative Rights PDP Working Group -

Please see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69273755/Impact%20Analysis%20-%20updated%2022%20Aug%202017.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1503593802000&api=v2 .

However, in reviewing the document, please note the following important caveats:

• This document was created by staff as a “starter draft” of sorts, to assist the Working Group work through the various policy options for what eventually (after much more extensive discussion and work) became Recommendation #5;
• While such assessments are deemed to be useful, they are not mandatory and need not be formally incorporated into the Final Report;
• When discussing the staff document, Working Group members did not agree with some of the staff-proposed impact scores;
• The sense of the Working Group following its discussion of the document was that such an exercise was no longer necessary going forward (it not being obligatory) – subsequent Working Group discussions then superseded the recommendations reflected in the document, and it is also important to note that the Working Group’s subsequent meetings included extensive discussions over the benefits and risks of each of the policy options under consideration. These are all documented in the Working Group’s meeting records and mailing list.

Thank you.

Cheers

Mary