I wanted you to raise that on the “unduly impair”, because again it seems to me that there are elements in the bill that lay out a very reasonable framework but then sometimes seem to get too intrusive, if we're going to “unduly impair”. It seems to me, from seeing what happened with DVDs with adding closed captioning, you're basically making a new copy of it. So what's the point to add a technological protection measure? Are kids going to take that home and put it on isoHunt and trade it with all their friends? It's highly unlikely. This is used in a very specific case.
Do you believe that we would be able to maintain the credibility of the intellectual property that's being used if we strike “unduly impair”?