 All right, John, so I just wanted to ask you in this case, do you think Jack Daniels is in the right? Should they be attacking these guys or just making, you know, a dog toy? Like what are your thoughts on that? As an intellectual property attorney, there's a duty on owners of intellectual property to protect their rights. In the case of Jack Daniels bringing the lawsuit, I don't think if I was their attorney, I would advise the same because it shows that they're policing their mark. Whether they ultimately should win, it's kind of a conflict between the Lanham Act and trademark rights versus the right to free speech. That's what this dog toy manufacturer is arguing. It's trademark law crushing free speech. My prediction is that's probably going to be what happens here. So it's not going to be ultimately good news for Jack Daniels in the case of being able to prevent sales of this. What I think would be helpful is anytime the Supreme Court provides guidance, it provides some clarity for future product manufacturers on how far they can go. This is kind of making a statement in a sense, right, to anybody else that might have had the same idea. Right, right, right.