There are a number of them, Mr. Hsu, and we'd be glad to give you a list of the ones that are of interest to us.
As an example, the bill deals with websites that are designed to promote file sharing. It is so restrictive that it doesn't deal with websites that facilitate file sharing and the violation of intellectual property. The intent was clear but the wording was not sufficiently precise to cover the range of instances that are of concern. It's this sort of thing.
The amendments we're proposing are technical in nature, but they're substantive. And as a result, what we've said is that yes, we believe it's important to act, but until we have a chance to see it, we can't make a decision on whether the bill should go ahead in its final form.