 think you are not on the right track so I think many people many economists will totally agree with you that trying to measure innovation in the ACT field just by patents is misguided. No I fully agree this was just some indicators and I know that and that's what I said a very large area of innovation is very difficult to measure but even if you take other metrics I didn't want to enter into the matrix because the message is not the key message is not how to measure is how do we enter into a more dynamic entrepreneurial culture but if you look at software expenditures IT expenditures if you look at that Europe is at 60% to 70% the relative expenditures in the US and in Japan so any matrix I use education in that fields IT professionals in that fields capital investment software investment R&D expenditures in all these fields the relative efforts of Europe fluctuates between 60 and 75% the relative efforts in the US and in Japan so we do less we should do more. We have a couple more questions. Thank you. Gentlemen in the second row and up there. As far as I understand what Commissioner Cruz was talking about is that openness means that proprietary technology statement that no software patents are in place here. How do you reconcile those two? Well let me make my point a bit clearer about pure software I think pure software patents are dangerous because except if we can identify very easily well we the examiners the prior art then if the prior art can be identified but this is related with with ex ante disclosure so that's the problem of ex ante