No, I don't. I think the bill respects the protections that people would have, again, for developing proprietary software. When you look at various industries, part of what makes one product possibly superior to another is that they might have some cutting-edge software that they use to operate a machine, or how it calculates things or does things for them. It's not about providing access to that proprietary software. It's more about making sure that people have the information they need to build the attachment that is required for that machine anyway.
Going back to my farming example, John Deere makes a John Deere header, but you can also buy a Honey Bee, a MacDon, a New Holland. You could buy lots of different types of headers that are going to attach to the front of it.
Exempting one group over the other, I don't think is what we're looking at. We're trying to create an ecosystem where people can innovate and do so without fear of having the Copyright Act chasing them down because they unlawfully circumvented TPM. This provides the protection that the big companies want and need, but it still also provides a certainty for the short-line guys to do the work that they want to do.