To come back to your question, it is clear that, to us, the best option was to uphold the expansion of the private copying regime. You say that people do not support that idea, but certainly if you ask someone to pay a fee they did not have to pay before, they are going to refuse to do it at first. We all want to get everything free of charge. Consumers would like not to pay for their electricity, or the gas tax. If we listened to them, there are a lot of taxes that would not be charged. In that case, there would be no more income tax, either.
You also talked about providers who say they do not benefit from illegal business done on the Internet. Piracy does not use 100 per cent of the bandwidth, granted, but the studies we have done show that about 40 per cent is used for entertainment and a large part of that 40 per cent is used for piracy.
We have never even considered, if there were to be a royalty or compensation to be paid, asking for 100 per cent of Internet service providers' revenue. That is not the kind of submission we make to the Copyright Board when we ask for a royalty from broadcasters. We are talking here about a percentage, not about these people's entire income. Obviously, if there were compensation, it would take into account the portion of the bandwidth that is used for that purpose. It is not 100 per cent, but it is nonetheless a significant percentage.