In fact, not a lot has changed. We added a couple of things within this provision where we talked about broadcasting and some other issues. I raised this to emphasize that this notion that we've taken culture off the table and that's a big win really doesn't tell the whole story of what it means to regulate in the current cultural environment. In fact, this may be unavoidable. But if we move forward with different kinds of proposals or see the kinds of proposals, let's say, that we saw from the Yale report, which do envision reforms within Canada's digital sector and within Canada's cultural sector, that quite clearly would run afoul of the kinds of things we've now agreed to within this new NAFTA.
What we are doing is, I think, potentially setting ourselves up for the U.S. to say that if we want to do this, they've given us right to do it—or we've negotiated the right to have that policy flexibility—but it's not free. In order for us to be able to take advantage of that, they are entitled to be able to levy measures of equivalent commercial effect, and they're free to pick and choose on what industry they want to have that kind of effect.
For example, you are talking about new kinds of levies on large Internet companies, which is one of the proposals in the Yale report, potentially talking about hundreds of millions of dollars that they will have to pay into that system. If the rules that we have are seen to violate the new NAFTA, that means the U.S. will be entitled to levy against whatever they want to target in Canada, measures of equivalent commercial effect. There is potentially a huge cost involved.