Okay. It is really important for companies to have legislative schemes in the privacy area that are interoperable. If you don't have interoperability, you'll create lots of confusion, lots of uncertainty. There will be reticence risk, which is the risk of not doing anything, and just overall problems with it.
All we're doing is actually incorporating a well-understood concept to ensure the term was used in a harmonized way and interoperabilities were similar. It's really important to do that. There would be adverse consequences: If you don't put it in, there will be an open question of why. Obviously it's a different standard, and our view is that there's no need for that. Privacy protection could be there. It's a very high standard right now, and we just don't need that at all. It will not be beneficial at all. Especially, striking the balance that we just heard from before.... That's why we're so strongly in support.
I will add that we had these consultations. They were extensive. A working group spent countless hours dealing with it. We met with folks. This was universally accepted in all our discussions. Yes, let's make it clear. Let's stay with this. It's the appropriate and prudent approach to take.