Your question is twofold. It wouldn't necessarily be a levy on everyone. We're able to determine that those people who are using higher speeds and have greater broadband access are downloading files. We can see that's currently infringing on copyright, and artists are not compensated for it. So there is a way to see that this is a targeted segment of the population. That's my point.
I think your other point was this will be unpopular with consumers. It may be, but we don't intend to make it unpopular with consumers. We want to get a very clear message out to consumers and our audiences that the creative class cannot survive without compensation. I live on a street where half of my neighbours are artists. They're musicians and actors. They contribute to society. They have kids, go to school, go to church, and pay their taxes. They deserve to earn a living too. If we want to live in a country that supports a creative class, we have to figure out how to monetize those illegal uses.
So we're not trying to stop the train; we're not trying to roll back or look at the past. We're trying to move forward in a way that we can retain our artists and ensure that they're properly compensated.