Ms. Lank, I'm surprised a lawyer would be surprised at the litigious attitude of the United States. From my background in law enforcement, it doesn't matter how good the law is; you can always hire somebody who, if they're good enough and smart enough in the legal industry, can get you off. I don't think anyone should be surprised if they do business in the United States, whether it's in agriculture or softwood lumber, that they're going to be taking you to court, because it's from a business perspective. They hire a pantheon and the bigger the company, the larger the legal department. They hire these guys to put little guys like you out of business. The good thing is that we have good guys like you to help stop that.
When I look at legislation, I always look at it from a regulatory perspective. I wrote down a note down as you were talking: regulation versus strangulation. At what point do we make enough rules that they actually stifle innovation? Are we anywhere near that? Does the proposed legislation stand a chance of strangulation? You never want to create a regulatory regime that actually doesn't allow people with good, new ideas. I'm thinking of patents and those other things. Most lawyers I know in the criminal field say patent lawyers are the rich guys on the block. At what point do we really stifle innovation with regulation?