It's kind of a controversial issue and I haven't landed in a place, but the CRTC started this to some degree talking about trial programs. Part of it, I think, is that if we're going to compete in a more global environment, we must be aware that almost every country, including now the United States, is looking to do co-productions. Jennifer here is just working on a co-production herself with the U.K. that is majority Canadian. We have to think about our foreign investment rules a little more closely in the industry.
We're now in a world where the Internet, on-demand, and everything are going to be what drives both TV and film. There's no intention anywhere to regulate that particular sector, and if that's the future of broadcasting, we've said implicitly that we don't have the issues about foreign entry, foreign competition, that we used to have in the past.
How do we then look at how we define Canadian content? Maybe for certain things, as the CRTC did, there's a threshold. Is it better to attract investment into those things where we're going to have global partners and we're going up against shows or movies of a scale we couldn't otherwise produce? It's the idea that maybe 50% of something that is 75% bigger than what we make is not such a bad thing.
I think we have to kick a couple of elephants in the room. If we have said—and I'm saying if—it's okay not to worry about regulating Netflixes, Googles, or whoever—I'm not saying that's good or bad—then we're less worried than we used to be about what the rules should be. Maybe we need to be more open and maybe we can at a certain threshold say that we're not going to worry as much about how we define Canadian beyond a certain point.