That's correct. That would be a violation of our policy, but not a violation of the law. We appeared in court before, on one occasion that I recall, because there had been a violation of policy but not a violation of the law, and that did not cause us a problem. Again, the policy has been tightened in order to reflect the seriousness that we attribute to undercover operations as a whole.
On May 30th, 2006. See this statement in context.