Thank you.

Sure thing.

Correct.

Eventually they will drop off, simply due to server capacity, but I can't tell you how long exactly they last.

I would also suggest that some people post tweets to other websites, and obviously if people took a screenshot of it or embedded that tweet and posted it to ...

How long do they exist?

The Twitter may be anonymous to other Twitter users. Whether they have given us personal information, or whatever personal information we may have, a contact email, whatever it may be, that's the personal information, and whatever personal information we have and are served to and are compelled to turn ...

We have a requirement under US law, before we turn over any personal information on the users, to do so only pursuant to a court order. So to the extent to which a British court ruling leads to a US court order that is served on us to compel that ...

I think the way we would look at it is whether or not the regulator is for that country, that jurisdiction, the entity which has the legal authority to effectuate it. For us there would be a difference between an organisation that might urge entities to adopt voluntary codes of ...

It was a very important game.

So issues like that, that have national significance and have captured the attention of the population, obviously can propagate much faster than things that may be more localised.

It depends on the subject, it depends on who's tweeting it and retweeting it. I mentioned that we now serve 250 million tweets a day, roughly. During major events, you know, the earthquake in Japan, tweets can propagate very quickly out of a particular jurisdiction, and often those tweets ...

We've always required a court order for disclosing personal information, and we obviously have dealt with law enforcement in other countries. We deal with law enforcement in the UK, and so they -- the law enforcement entities here know the process in the US. For emergency purposes, we also have ...

Not yet.

Yeah, we announced this not yet two weeks ago.

We only deal with the issues reactively, so, by definition, the tweets have already been posted. So this isn't something where ahead of time we're able to see the tweet, filter the tweet, mediate the tweet; the tweets flow, and so they're already out, and so everything ...

If there were individual unique tweets from those users, we would need -- and we would give due process to each of those users, yes.

Right. We would deal with the tweet at the tweet level. So if the tweet itself, regardless of whether the user is a verified user or using a pseudonym or is anonymous, and if the content of the tweet in a jurisdiction is determined to be illegal and through due ...

If the tweet were -- yes, we would need something from each jurisdiction to affirm that it is illegal in each of those jurisdictions.

Correct. Where the tweet is not illegal, it is available to other users worldwide.

Correct.

Yes. As we -- when we receive that, we will address those on a case-by-case basis and then promptly take down the tweet or the account, and I think in tab 11, the second page, you see how the tweets would be withheld or the account withheld. So we do not ...

Correct.

Correct. We would not want to put ourselves in the position of trying to adjudicate ourselves what is or what is not defamatory and so we would rely on legal process to determine that.

Yes, and often Twitter is used as precisely that, sort of a pointer device where Twitter users will say, "Check out this website", and provide the link to content that is then hosted elsewhere on some other site.

That is a limiting feature, yes.

We don't -- they certainly read some of them just out of sheer curiosity, but we wouldn't have the ability to mediate the content or filter it ahead of time. We cannot do that.

Correct.

It need not be verified; correct. Genuine.

We have whatever account information that they have given us. So that account information is the information that can be sought.

You have two separate issues. One is to deal with the tweet itself and whether or not that tweet should be subsequently withheld and grey-boxed out and indicated to users in the UK that the content has been withheld.

In the US, under US law, which is our jurisdiction, we ...

Presumably under the British system, if they were seeking recourse, they would go to a British legal authority. The British system has a mutual legal assistance treaty with the United States, and we could go then to the US jurisdiction. Twitter UK doesn't deal with content issues. That's ...

Well, that would be a determination for British policy makers and British courts.

Correct.

I think what this reflects -- and again, the list there of credit card numbers, street address, social security numbers and the like is an illustrative list. There may be other -- this, for example, doesn't include private phone numbers and others which might also be included. But it is generally ...

That's right.

Correct.

Correct.

Correcting.

Correct. The nature of Twitter's service is inherently public. People go to Twitter to tweet public messages and also to consume messages from others publicly. So that is an inherent characteristic of the service. You can, as you noted, change that setting to have private tweets, if you so ...

Certainly users can send such messages and they certainly can do that in pseudonymous or anonymous form. As you mentioned, there are two sides to that coin. I think most countries in the world recognise freedom of expression as a human right. Depending on the subject matter and to whom ...

Correct.

Yes.

Correct.

Obviously our corporate goal is to reach everybody on the planet. We are in most countries in the world. We are notably not in China, where we are blocked.

On a monthly basis, we have over 100 million active users. 70 per cent of our users are now outside of the United States, and by way of volume, the service has obviously grown enormously over the last several years. Twitter will turn six years old this coming May, and ...

I think roughly right now we have 700 employees.

Correct.

That's correct.

Well done.

Right.

I was happy to do so.