It's just one of the things we want to bring up in terms of how broad the approach is and how we would recommend more of a regulatory exception-by-exception approach, as they have in the United States. It's done through the Library of Congress. Every year they come out with a list of exceptions.
Perhaps I could just make a quick point. Everything I'm hearing about what's needed to fix this problem, which sounds like a big problem, is something you're already allowed to do under the Copyright Act. That's clear. All of the copyright lawyers on our committee agree with that.
When you're saying that they need to supply external specifications and that internal interfaces need to be fully defined, I think a lot of what might be required here is outside of the Copyright Act. The Copyright Act provides for almost everything. We could make these amendments that would make some of it clear, especially with respect to “not-smart” devices. However, if you're talking about somebody supplying you with external specifications, I think that goes to what the Public Interest Advocacy Centre was saying, which was that it's more in the realm of the competition laws and the consumer protection act.
The Copyright Act is really not blocking anything here that I can see.