Industry committee  That's left to the courts, but with respect to this, there's an analysis, which asks, is it confusing? Would a consumer looking at these in the marketplace think they are from the same source?

Industry committee  You've exhausted my contribution.

Industry committee  After the legislation was tabled, we received some comments, or I believe comments were supplied to the committee with respect to the exact drafting and whether it actually fulfilled the entire intention of the provision. I'll provide a bit of information on where the law stands as it is now, on what it would do unamended, and what the amendment seeks to do.

Industry committee  I believe so, yes.

Industry committee  The distinction with the previous one, with respect to filing an RFA and actual litigation, is that during litigation this amendment seeks to explicitly include a reference to frivolous or vexatious litigation and grounds for compensation. As it stands right now, with respect to federal court rules or various provincial court rules, there are explicit references to this type of litigation and ways of dismissing these actions through pleadings, statements of claim, extra security for costs, or, in the end, punitive damages or heightened attorney fees.

Industry committee  Thank you. With respect to G-2, it seeks to amend a provision that allows the owner, importer, or exporter to pay security to the court after an action has been initiated to have the goods released. A court would determine on what security or conditions those goods could be released.