Well, the original law, which applied to tape recorders, essentially, the private copying levy, didn't just apply to tape recorders. If you read it, it's technologically neutral. It says, essentially, that any device that is capable of receiving an audio recording should in fact pay a levy. There should be a levy imposed on those devices.
But the judge in the Superior Court who made the decision most recently that digital audio recorders would not be subject to the levy made an error, in our view. Now, judges make errors. We feel he made an error. We did not have the resources to challenge that decision in the Supreme Court of Canada, unfortunately.
There's a legislative solution, but I know it's not very palatable, obviously. People don't like to impose costs against consumer goods, but, frankly, I think at the level of the law a mistake was made. The private copying levy should apply to any device that is capable of recording music. This is our official position and we've stood by that position all the way along. We don't feel, however, that that's a licence for people to download illegal materials. They are two different matters, and one should not confuse them.