Thank you.
You touched on a number of topics, but I think the bill is WIPO-compliant as it is. Certainly we can craft exemptions to it if we wish to do it. The question is whether we wish to do it and whether it's appropriate in the circumstances.
I don't want to get into an argument with you over whether my sofa is akin to a copyright, but copyright is an intellectual property right, and the reasons we have an intellectual property right are twofold. One, it is to reward creative efforts, and two, it is to stimulate creation. We're sitting here. The chamber represents not just big business but also little business, but copyright goes back to the authors and the creators. The reason we have copyright is to reward creativity.
We talked about striking a balance. That's fine. The balance we have to work at is how much reward to give to the creators and authors, and that's why we're all here today and that's why the legislation needs to be updated.
One thing we should not have is any misconception that copyright is just something to enrich the pockets of big business. It goes back to authors and creators. That's the fundamental foundation to the right.
How far does the right go? We now have an opportunity to make changes, to look at this to see what's appropriate in the digital age.