Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Braid.
Certainly, ISPs under the act would be obligated to receive notices from rights holders that there's infringement activity and to pass those notices on to the subscriber in question without identifying the subscriber or violating the privacy rights. Then they would also have to retain the records about that, so if the rights holder wants to pursue litigation, there's an evidentiary record.
The fact is that large Canadian ISPs have been doing this for a decade, with no legal obligation, and in cases where, in the United States and Europe, ISPs have been doing nothing to respond to peer-to-peer file sharing. So in fact we've been a decade ahead of the curve. France and the U.K. have now developed models that have led them to notice and notice, which is the model that, as I said, ISPs have already been undertaking without the legal obligation, without a lot of formal structures.
So it's the appropriate response to peer-to-peer file sharing where the ISP doesn't know what content is on the end user's computer; quite frankly, we don't want ISPs to know what content is on the end user's computer, but it sends a message, and has an education component, so the consumer knows what they're doing is wrong.