I do think my colleagues have put forward some really helpful information today in terms of the historical context and the original thinking by the Copyright Board to have discounted rates, essentially, when radio was hurting, in order to demonstrate the music industry's willingness to play ball with a very important partner. Radio is still probably one of the most important—if not the most important—individual drivers for getting people to share new music, but it's by no means the only individual driver.
I started my career in radio. When I started my career in radio, it used to be that you could play a song on a Tuesday morning on a radio station and there would be lineups at the record store, right? There was that kind of really intense cause-and-effect relationship between the music industry and the radio business. That's not the case anymore. That's not to say that radio isn't still incredibly important in the value chain for music, but there are a lot more ways in which music is being exposed, and the ways in which people consume music are very different.
So in some ways, to my colleagues' point, the amounts that radio stations were paying for rights over those years were deliberately undervalued, because in some ways there was the argument that radio stations make over and over again about the promotional value of music, which is still valid, but not nearly to the same degree that it was 10 years ago, 5 years ago, or 20 years ago. So given that the relationship has changed, given that music was undervalued, what we have now been doing is bringing the value of music up to what is actually a fairer market value.
That, I think, has been part of the struggle here in trying to understand the differences in terms of the rights that we're compensated for and how they compare over the historical record.