 The one key thing about this, the IT crime conference, has been the scope and the breadth of it. For instance, you have countries represented from all parts of the world here. In addition, you have prosecutors, customs officials, police, all elements of the enforcement strategy that any company or rights holder would really need to take on if they want to enforce their brand. So the value is not only in being able to meet with all the different officials, but also in being able to address all the different substantive elements that are involved in IP enforcement. For instance, there was conference elements involving customs issues, something involving internet, asset seizures. Interesting topic also was discussed was nuisance abatement in the context of high rates and counterfeiters who might be selling infringing products out of properties. And are there remedies perhaps to look at those property owners who might be involved in those illegal activities? What we're seeing here is a full range of the IP enforcement world and all the different elements that need to be really addressed if you're a stakeholder or rights holder who wants to protect their intellectual property rights. Interpol's value in combating IP crime cannot be matched. It provides a hub, a kind of a central point that enforcement officials can turn to for not only resources and assistance on the technical capacity, but also in terms of identifying contacts in a lot of these countries where the issues are pretty much the same and the challenges are all equal. In addition, the value of Interpol in combating IP crime is that in this day and age there's limited resources that governments and industry have in fighting piracy and counterfeiting. The value that Interpol provides is by taking advantage of those finite resources that governments have, that industry has, and pulling together those resources for a conference such as the IP crime conference that's occurring in Panama this week. For the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, our involvement in Interpol has been very critical to some of the success that we're looking to achieve in the regions where we're involved in terms of education and informing enforcement officials about the best practices and tools needed to fight piracy and counterfeiting. The partnership that we have with Interpol has been very valuable in that sense because both governments and industry have limited resources, and so to the extent that we can work together in partnership as we've been doing, it really adds not only value to the work that we're doing, but also to rights holders and stakeholders who are also involved in fighting piracy and counterfeiting worldwide. Well, I think one area that we're looking at is certainly the Internet. The Internet is changing the business model for companies in terms of what they need to do to protect their rights online, but it's also changing the model that criminals and those involved in counterfeiting and piracy model that they're taking in terms of acquiring infringing products and also the distribution of those products worldwide. And so I think going forward, that's an area that is going to have a lot more attention brought on by not only just governments and industry, but also the partnerships that are working together to try to tackle those challenges. Capacity building and training are a critical element when you start looking at the IP enforcement regime and what needs to be done to protect rights holders. Many countries certainly have staffing regarding police, customers, officials and prosecutors, but they don't necessarily have the expertise or experience in fighting IP crime. And that's one of the reasons that Interpol and the USPTO have worked together very closely on capacity building and training on best practices for enforcement officials from throughout the world. Without capacity building and training, a lot of the enforcement officials are coming in without any expertise and understanding on not only how to address the problem, but what is the scope and the risks involved with regards to piracy and counterfeiting. One of the biggest challenges now when we start looking at IP enforcement is the risk that now are occurring to the public health and safety aspect. This day and age we see counterfeiters and pirates are no longer going after strictly content issues, let's say movies and film, but they're also progressing into areas of consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, things that really have a public health aspect to tie in. And the risks, of course, are immense. The dangers involved in potentially consuming or using counterfeit products are very high. A very important component of this conference has been a mix of not only larger plenary sessions involving issues that might span across the entire range of IP enforcement, but also breakout sessions, operational roundtables that have been occurring, and that enables the participants to get really deeper into the issues that they might not be able to address on a more plenary level basis. In addition, it allows for stronger contacts to be established between a lot of the officials here that on a general basis maybe know each other, but haven't been able to have the opportunity to talk more deeply about some enforcement strategies and tools that they've been privately using within their own countries. Overall, I think that the IP crime conference has been an invaluable experience, not only for me, but I think also for the other participants. I think we have on the agenda over 100 different speakers or facilitators involved in terms of a substantive role in the program. And to pull together so many experts from the different parts of the world is a great opportunity for those who are looking to understand the cutting-edge issues involved in IP enforcement and fighting piracy and counterfeiting worldwide.