Dear EPDP Team, Below, please find the notes and action items from today’s EPDP Team call. Thank you. Best regards, Marika, Berry and Caitlin High-Level Notes/Actions Thomas to propose new language in response to feedback he has received from the team for the Responsible Parties portion of the initial report today. Following receipt of Thomas’s language, Support Staff will circulate final version of the Initial Report to the EPDP Team. The Initial Report will be published for public comment tomorrow, 21 November 2018, unless “showstoppers” are identified that would warrant further discussion. These high-level notes are designed to help the EPDP Team navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/ZwPVBQ 1.        Roll Call & SOI Updates Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect Remember to mute your microphones when not speaking and state your name before speaking for transcription purposes. Please remember to review your SOIs on a regular basis and update as needed. Updates are required to be shared with the EPDP Team. 2.        Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair a)        Review of outstanding action items b)       Other updates, if applicable Communication from ICANN travel department is forthcoming (likely this week) We are aiming to publish the Initial Report tomorrow (Wed, 21 Nov) so that the comment deadline is before the Christmas holiday. EPDP Team Feedback: It is more important to deal with outstanding items rather than publish to hit a date 3.        Finalize outstanding items: a)                Purpose O – see proposed language for addressing this in the Initial Report It may be beneficial to publish Purpose O in the initial report to allow the public to weigh in on it. The proposed language is confusing. It may be helpful to note we have not deliberated on this, but we are including for the purpose of receiving feedback. What question is ICANN considering here? As the Purpose O workbook has not been reviewed, it will not be included with the other approved workbooks (due to the differing status) Grave concerns with Purpose O - there are issues in terms of timeliness, issues in terms of unanswered questions with respect to this purpose. This language should not go in except to say - this came in late and the Team has not had adequate time to discuss this. There are concerns that this could necessitate changes to the RA. If so, this is a big red flag that we need to signal to the community. The word "threat" should be removed. This language should still be included in the initial report. This needs wordsmithing, but we have to keep this purpose. In formulating this person, Benedict and Farzaneh asked if OCTO uses personal information, the answer is no. The group has not had time to adequately discuss this. This also includes the accuracy reporting system. The program is on hold. We must include this issue in the initial report. In order to solicit public comment, this needs to be included. What we are talking about a purpose - this should be covered under Purpose B/Purpose 2. This is not a purpose that justifies collection. If it included, make a clear disclaimer that this has not been reviewed, but it will be reviewed prior to the final report. Without knowing ICANN’s needs, the Team cannot make an informed decision about this language. Note: the proposed language will be included in the body of the report, not within the recommendations section We cannot treat ICANN org the same as third parties under Purpose B There is a different interpretation as to whose research this entails - is it just ICANN or other researchers? Two questions: this cannot be put in at the last-minute b/c the Team has not discussed. (1) This is a data quality issue - this is an implementation issue. (2) should ICANN be doing this data quality exercise? Proposed path forward: introduce proposed purpose and ask for public comment. Action Item: Staff will circulate proposed language for the team's review. b)               Additional language re. responsibilities section (Thomas) Thomas circulated this language earlier this week. This language aims to shed light on contracting, EBERO How would operationalizing these agreements work? A potential solution is proposed here - clarify that there is a plethora of JCAs. Leave flexibility to the parties who are entering into the agreements. We could make this better if we had more time. Diane offered additional changes. Action item: Thomas to include suggestions made by Diane, put in clarification to Marc, add a note that the drafting of the JCA is not within the scope of this EPDP today. c)                Additional language re. UDRP (Margie) – see updated version circulated on Monday 19 November The updated language lays out the perspective of those who believe the changes in the temp spec have not caused any issues There is advocacy in this language. The point about privacy/proxy is that complaints can be filed without access to registration data, so the note about privacy/proxy is irrelevant. Cannot support this language going forward as is. Rather than say "some believe" add the specific parties who believe to this sentence. Primary concern from formatting perspective - the repeated reference to "some". It should say "proponents of pre-filing disclosure believe". Using some to refer to different views/groups is confusing. Action Item: Staff to send a rewrite of this UDRP section to the team following this call. (completed) d)               Revised language for Preliminary Recommendation #2 – see revised version circulated on Monday 19 November by staff No objections to this text noted 4.        Next steps for publication: a)                Public comment forum – Google form See google form shared during the meeting Objective is to facilitate focused input from commenters but also review by EPDP Team following closing of public comment forum. Downloadable form will be available to allow for off-line preparations No sign up is required, only email address needs to be provided. Open fields will also be provided for general input. b)               Community Webinar Organize community webinar to present report and explain public comment forum. Proposal to have staff present outline of report and how to submit comments, unless group prefers to do so. If report is published on Wednesday, webinar would be held on Thursday 28 November, if it is published next week, it would be on Thursday 4 December. c)                Letter to EDPB d)               Confirm publication date target Aim to publish tomorrow, unless show stoppers are identified that would warrant further consideration. 5.        Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Tuesday 28 November 2018 a)        Confirm action items b)       Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any