I would agree with that. I mentioned reversionary rights in my presentation, and I don't want to be understood as necessarily suggesting that the way to deal with reversionary rights is to eliminate reversion from the copyright altogether. That's one possible solution, maybe a good solution. There are also other solutions, and certainly with the extension of the term of copyright, which I do think is a good idea, and I've been on the record saying that for some time, how you deal with copyright over that extended term is certainly an issue.
My main point, and it remains regardless of whether the term is life plus 50 or life plus 70, is where reversion is concerned we need to look at it in a way that's less disruptive to the commercial exploitation of copyright. I think the point remains either way.