 Thank you, Samar. I'll make some remarks and Eric is here as the expert to correct or change. So in 2011 we see, you know, the same story of a very vigorous demand for the dispute resolution services that are provided by the WIPO arbitration and mediation centre in relation to cases of cyber squatting with a slight increase in the number of cases that the centre handled, the increase being 2.5%. And overall we had over 2,700, 2,764 domain name, internet domain name cases covering nearly 5,000 separate domain names. As we've said in past years this is a very international procedure reflecting the international character of the internet and activity on the internet. So these cases have been administered by some 323 panellists from 49 countries in 13 different languages. Two other comments I would make just by way of introduction. We are dealing with a rising share of country code, top level domain disputes, CCTLDs. They're now 16% of all of the disputes that are handled by the WIPO arbitration and mediation centre. And our capacity to handle those is increasing with, for example, the administration of cases relating to .qa, Qatar, and its Arabic script equivalent. The second comment is that this year is the year of much activity in respect of the expansion of the generic top level domain space. As you know since January of this year, since January 2012, interested parties have been able to apply to ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, for their own top level domain. Whatever it might be. The application procedures close in April of this year and then there will open the possibility for other parties to file objections against the applications that have been made. And the WIPO centre has been appointed by ICANN as the exclusive provider of dispute resolution services in respect of trademark based objections to applications for new generic top level domains. And so that is a procedure that we will be administering, but watching with great interest as this expansion of the top level domain space unfolds in the course of this year. Any questions? Yes, it's a question to Mr. Wilbur, sorry, because I know you've been rather vocal critic of the proposals or the idea of having altering the existing dispute settlement procedures for cyber squatting and lots of concern that these new top level domains would lead to an explosion in a number of cases. I was wondering to the extent to which your concerns have been addressed. I know you've written a number of letters on this issue, warning about any change in the existing procedures. Have those concerns been addressed or are we still in the same situation? We were the last time we spoke on this. Thank you. Thank you, Dan. I think what you're referring to is perhaps picking up on something that we did address right here a year ago, which concerns the state of the existing dispute resolution mechanism on which Director General has just, of course, reported the numbers for last year, namely the UDRP. And here I can, the body which is responsible for the, let's say, structuring an organization of the domain name system as a whole, have been going through processes discussing the possible needs to review and revise the UDRP system in the future. And so the concern that we have been expressing was that that might not benefit, in fact, the efficacy of UDRP, but that UDRP might actually emerge from such an effort rather diluted as a less effective mechanism than it has been so far. Last year has seen a lot of policy activity about that around ICANN. And in the end of the day, it has been decided by ICANN after a lot of policy input, including from WIPO, but also others, such as INTA, the International Trademark Association, that any UDRP revision effort will not start until a good period has passed after the introduction of the first numbers of new top-level domains. And since the introduction of new top-level domains is from now estimated to be just about one year ahead of us, that means that this whole UDRP revision effort is going to be, is being postponed for an interesting period for the time being. So that goes to the concern about the efficacy of the UDRP today, which continues to function very well. Overall, perhaps taking this occasion to raise and confirm a concern, which you also see in those various letters and in our policy activity with ICANN, which is the efficacy of new mechanisms additional to UDRP, which are in the pipeline in relation to new top-level domains, which will be introduced in the course in the beginning of next year. There ICANN have been developing different mechanisms. One of the ones is the one that Director General has mentioned, the pre-delegation dispute resolution policy for trademark owners that believe that the applications for new top-levels come too close to the trademark. But there are also other new mechanisms in the pipeline. And so our concern at the moment is about the efficacy of those other new ADR alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, whether they in the course of 2013 will prove helpful to trademark owners and not unduly costly and taking too much time. We're looking at that. And of course beyond writing the letters, we engage quite actively with ICANN, their staff and in their meetings. Go ahead. I also take the floor of follow-up. I just want to follow up on your comments, Mr. Wilbur, about the alternative dispute mechanisms that are out there. Can you give an example of one, which is a particular concern that you mentioned 2013, there might be an introduction of these and who would be introducing it and what will they be doing? So let me maybe roughly take you through the timeline which ICANN have been putting out and which you can find back on their website. Since 11 or 12, rather January, applicants can submit applications for new top-level domains, so new .coms, to the right of the dot, which they would like to be operating in the future. And that period runs until 12 April. And I can tell you that from our information, I can have today received roughly 140, 150 indications from parties that wish to, let me correct this here. Let me say this more precisely. Within these three months period, applicants, not all applicants will immediately be filing their full application for top-level domain, but they also have an early opportunity to file an intent to submit applications for top-level domains. And so ICANN, as of today, seem to have received something like between 140 and 150 of these pre-applications, which therefore within this period until 12 April would have to be transformed into actual applications for top-level domains. However, it must be understood that each one of those 140 or so pre-applications may be converted into up to 50, actual applications for new top-level domains. So it's hard to do the math on this because we do not know quite simply today which ones of those 140 represent only one future application and which ones represent up to 50, but this already means that we're looking probably at hundreds of new applications, applications for new domains coming in. We will know about this in May when ICANN will be publishing, after closing the application window, will be publishing the list of applications that have been received. We don't know today what that will include, but it's quite likely that there will be quite a few geographical applications in there, for example, cities trying to have their operator own top-level domain under the name of the city. There may well be a number of brand owners trying to take their own domain, and there may also be certain domains which probably come closer to certain more generic terms, certain types of services, certain areas of business, certain types of products. ICANN will run a public objection or comment period for a couple of months after May, and then effectively until roughly the end of the year, an objection period is starting in which outsiders, including trademark owners, can file objections against any of these applications for potentially infringing a variety of rights, such as trademark rights, but there are others as well. After that period is over, if there has been an objection filed against an application, then that objection period process will start, which will take a number of months, into the spring of 2013. If there is no objection filed against any of these applications, which you will know by the end of this year, then those domains obviously could come online earlier, so probably in the first part of next year. So that is roughly speaking the timeline that ICANN has been announcing. Sorry, very briefly, and the UDRP would be the rules for settling disputes within those new domains, correct? The UDRP will remain effective. That means, I think it's important to understand that when it comes to the new domains, that the first concern, of course, is possible objections, as I just mentioned, against that top level application itself, against the name to the right of the dot. But once the domain has passed that hurdle, has passed the objection period, and becomes operational, then the attention shifts back, of course, again, to registrations being undertaken by anybody, third parties, to the left of the dot. So X dot, whatever that new top level might be. And for those second level registrations, UDRP continues to function, and then on top of that there will be one or two additional second level mechanisms.