That's a terrific question. I'm always glad to have people read my blog.
I thought it was a very powerful presentation from the witnesses, and my sense was that the committee was very sympathetic. If the government was to move forward with health and safety issues, as I say, I think we first need to better understand where the shortcomings in the law are. But just for the purposes of argument, if we accept that there may be some things we could do to bolster our laws that are concerned with health and safety, I think that's a very good thing.
However, my concern with this file generally—and it really relates to the very first issue I pointed to—is the attempt to use the counterfeiting umbrella to cover all sorts of other things.
There are other legal issues that could be recommended. I'll give you one example. Ratification of the World Intellectual Property Organization Internet treaties has caused an enormous amount of controversy in countries around the world. Even in the United States, the architect of that law has now admitted that the laws have been unsuccessful. In my view, they have negative consequences for privacy, for security research, and for innovation more generally. I think it has had a negative impact, in many respects. The laws are a decade old. They don't look forward.
My concern is that we could see a government take that broad look at counterfeiting and move forward, not just on the core issues that may need something such as health and safety, but as an opportunity to venture into other areas. The impact would be felt much more widely than merely dealing with the fake Gucci bag.