I think the general principles do serve us quite well. But what we've experienced, especially as new technologies have emerged in recent years, is specific privacy legislation or regulation trying to address new concerns, whether identity theft, or spam, or some of the national security issues that have arisen. We're now likely to see some of these other new issues come up. We've even seen data localization at a provincial level pop up in a number of instances as well.
I think part of it is a matter of being live to the issue. If we look at the experience with the TPP, we see that the Australians were aware of exactly what I have been talking about. They obtained a side letter from the United States specifically addressing the potential for them to be be subject to EU demands on the one hand and U.S.-led demands in regard to the TPP on the other hand. Canadian negotiators, with all respect, seemed to be asleep at the switch and didn't raise the same kind of issue and didn't obtain the same sort of thing. Had the TPP, which now seems like it's dead, come to fruition, Australia would have protected itself in terms of data transfer issues and privacy protection; Canada would not have.