One thing that has been made clear by the Federal Court of Appeal decision is that the law was anything but clear. We were trying to get clarification, and that's what we've received. The judgment actually states that in a number of instances.
The philosophical objection we had to the commissioner looking at the documents had nothing to do with our programming activities; it had to do with our journalistic activities. But the law lumped them together. So if we wanted to have a debate with the commissioner about the journalistic piece, we unfortunately had to have a debate over everything.
Philosophically, we certainly don't have any objection to the commissioner looking at our programming material. As we said in the statement that was released yesterday, and as Mr. Lacroix said in his remarks this morning, our main concern was the journalistic sources and material.