You're welcome. Thanks.

Thank you, sir. I'll take that back with me.

I think that's right. We have the technology when it comes to images, like sexual abuse content or images, to go further, but there's -- and part of that is -- you might be familiar with photo DNA, which we put in Bing, we put in Hotmail, we put in ...

Yes. That would be my preference on that question.

We actually do. We've put a lot of thought into privacy-enhancing features. In fact, we just celebrated our 10-year anniversary for Trustworthy Computing, which is the group that looks at: how do we build privacy and security into our products at the beginning so they make sense as you ...

Yeah.

There you're getting beyond my technical background.

Yeah. A browser really is just a mechanism to find a resource on the Internet. That's the primary function of a browser, is to find what you're looking for through a url.

Yeah, I think we could take a closer look at our global statement that we're looking at and see if there might be some modifications for UK users.

That's correct. We'd look at it from a case-by-case basis, so the standard -- I'm not sure I quite agree how strong it has to be. It has to be credible and particular. It doesn't have to be a court order, just to be completely clear, but ...

That's probably a little beyond my knowledge of UK law and how I think about the -- my background, if you will. I think it's complicated.

I think it's conflicted, and that does get back to the ecosystem and how you think about the various avenues by which you might try to remove this material. It would probably be the case that you would look at a number of different avenues, not just one and ...

That's correct.

Yes.

I think largely that would be the case. Certainly if Microsoft is a party to that court order, we would absolutely remove it. If Microsoft wasn't -- or is not a party to that court order, we would look at it and make sure the specificity is there and the ...

From a question standpoint and from a reading of this, I think that's probably accurate, but if you look at page 3 of the memorandum that we submitted, we actually don't differentiate defamatory material from privacy-invading material. I can tell you our practice in the UK would be ...

Yeah, we would be willing to consider that.

That's absolutely right, sir; we do not want to be the judge. What happens is -- of course you look at it on a case-by-case basis. Is it particular to what they're trying to accomplish? Is there a court order? If there is, you know, we would abide by ...

Yes, we are. In fact, in the memorandum we attached, we actually -- if you refer to that, we do go further than that statement to say that we'll look at things on a case-by-case basis.

I'm not aware of material available in the UK that could soften the stance we have in this document.

Yes, we would. This is a global statement, and maybe in some ways you might look at it as setting a minimum bar for how we were going to conduct such activities. If you think about the UK and how our practice is today, we have, in the past, looked ...

No, that would be enough. I mean, just from a mechanism standpoint, there's a couple of ways you can do that, or more. We're not prescriptive on how we get such a notice, but one way is there's a feedback section. If you go to Microsoft.co ...

That's exactly right.

Yeah, that's precisely correct, sir. We actually -- to be real technical, we block that particular url from showing up in the jurisdiction in which we're talking about. In this case, it would be the UK.

Generally, I would say yes, but it does depend on the -- if you look at this tab, there are three different scenarios. There's child sexual abuse content, there's intellectual property and then there's defamation and invasion of privacy, and for some of those the standards are a ...

Yes, that's generally correct.

With the example the ISP? I think that would be narrowly tailored to precisely that content, so I don't think that would impact beyond the precise thing you're really trying to take down.

Yes, sir, I think that's correct.

Yeah, which gets you back to things like the web host or creator of the content. That's a more elegant solution, a more comprehensive solution.

I think that's fair to say, yeah.

Right, for an ISP in particular, if they were to prevent access to that content, it would apply across all the consumers and businesses that use that ISP to connect to the Internet.

There's a whole set of laws that were developed under the E-Commerce Directive that came out in 2000 and was formed into a regulation in the UK in 2002, that relate to how you think about the Internet and liability around the Internet and who has what obligations, and ...

The ISPs, we think of them as connecting the user to the Internet from a global level, and then it's up to that particular user as to where they want to go and what they want to view on the Internet.

Yes.

It depends on the case, but it can be.

There should be mechanisms to find the hosting service provider based on where the content is originating, so I think typically you should be able to find where that material is located.

Sure. The hosting service provider is the entity or person who is actually putting the content on the website for everyone to see worldwide. The Internet service provider, we sometimes talk about -- in terms of "last mile" but that's how you connect to the Internet. Your ISP connects you ...

Yeah, that's correct.

Yes, I think it can, and that's why, if you look at the way the Internet law has developed over the years, it contemplated other avenues to try and remove things beyond just going to the person who was the original author or the original person putting it up ...

Yes. If you can remove the creator of the content, then that eliminates the problem across the entire web. So that, I think, is a first course of action.

Understood.

Yes.

Yes, we'd tailor it to what we think British citizens would want to see when they do a search. So it's tailored to that group.

Right. We have servers around the world. The Bing servers that do the bulk of gathering the information from the Internet and creating an index are based in the US, although we do have a server in Dublin that will cache some of that information, so if you are doing ...

Right. There's no editorial function other than -- again, it's a subset of sources, so that's not necessarily editorial but does limit what you'll find in Bing News, based on those sources that have been specified in advance. After that, it's all the machine that's ...

Yeah, that is correct.

Yeah, that's accurate. Bing News is, if you will, a subset of the index because the way Microsoft does it at least, we choose different sources for that news. It's not the entirety of what we can find across the world; it's various sources that we've ...

I think you could say that.

Yes, that's accurate.

Yes.