Thanks very much, Ms. Stanley.
Thanks for the question.
First of all, I think the King case was not really about interoperability. It wasn't about homebrew cases; it was about somebody who was trafficking in pirated anti-circumvention devices and who, as part of the defence, raised that these devices theoretically—which on the facts seemed to be case—could also be used for homebrew, but the evidence was pretty clear that this wasn't what they were being used for. They were being used to reproduce infringing games.
I think that in the context of what that case was really about, that decision wasn't about interoperability; it was about somebody who was trafficking in devices that basically allowed for infringement of copyright. I think that's the first thing.
On the other thing, I think Dr. Rosborough has taken the position that the case reads in some necessity requirement to the interoperability provision, which on the facts of the case and on the decision itself I don't actually think is the case.
I'm happy to discuss that further.