Right. We're looking at copyright, but we're looking at it in terms of the U.S., where the notice of fair use is very well defined. Here we're a little more airy-fairy on it. Some of their fair use, yes, you certainly can make a congressman look like a kangaroo if you want, and that's considered fair use. Here we might consider....
But are we looking at employing copyright against someone's misuse, manipulation of image, because it isn't within a fair use domain? They're not taking something that was accurately said, they're actually manipulating and twisting it and saying this is your member of Parliament. Is that how we engage?