As noted on the WG call yesterday, a few commenters on Section 1.3.3 of our Initial Report provided suggestions on additional research or work that can be done, possibly as part of implementation, on the topic. These are:

Business Constituency:

- "The BC believes that consultation with consumer protection authorities and privacy advocates with experience in these issues can be particularly helpful. The BC agrees that the task is not to define what constitutes commercial activity itself, but identify a subset of practices for which it is a reasonable to insist on transparency [rather than be able to use P/P services]."

Intellectual Property Constituency:

- "IPC would strongly support identifying [existing provider policies that ban some commercial usages] as a best practice for service providers at a minimum. IPC recommends that the WG flag for priority consideration during the implementation phase of this process the development of an illustrative framework mechanism for how complaints that a particular domain name is being used to carry out online financial transactions for commercial purposes should be submitted, processed, evaluated, and acted upon."

In addition to the above comments that were provided as specific responses to the questions the WG posed under Section 1.3.3, other commenters also provided additional suggestions for other parts of our Initial Report. As mentioned previously, these are listed in Part 4 of the WG Public Comment Review Tool, although some have also been referred to specific Sub Teams in cases where the additional comment seemed directly relevant to an issue being considered by a particular Sub Team.