Probably it's my fault for not asking the question not with ultimate precision. We see it a little bit in microcosm in relation to the recent history, that for whatever reason the Daily Mail don't publish. You've made your point in relation to how the Daily Mail, you think, obtained relevant information, but they didn't act on it. Eventually it comes out in the United States of America. We don't know on what basis they obtained the information for their story, but once it's out in the public domain, it's now in the public domain, and so everyone else -- by which I mean other organs of the press -- can now comment, can't they, on the story which is now, by definition, in the public domain?