No, I wouldn't agree that. Everyone's entitled -- everyone is entitled to a degree of privacy, no question. What I was alluding -- what I was alluding to there was the point I was making earlier, which is that -- which is that -- which is that -- is that -- is that we are seeking to compete in a different medium with different rules against different competitors from different countries, and we already -- we already -- we already -- we already work under a tighter regulatory system and legal system than everywhere else and I wouldn't want to see it tightened any further. That's all I'm trying to say there.
The point I'm making on a more general, if you like, philosophical level is that, as a society, we have to in a way stop worrying too much about what happens in every corner of the Internet and accept that the Internet brings us many, many, many brilliant things, but there's a price for everything. But I think if you asked people, "Would you rather have a free Internet and accept that every now and again somebody's going to behave badly on it, or would you rather live in North Korea where they don't have any Internet?", they would rather live in a free society and I think we have to balance the restrictions that regulation places on individual freedom against the benefit, and if you're asking me how do you regulate beyond the established media, I'm saying it's very, very difficult and probably you're using a sledgehammer to crack a nut but that's not the same thing as it as to say you shouldn't regulate the serious media. I freely accept that and in many ways personally I'm glad for it.