 When you have an idea and you act on that idea, that idea can become a number of different things. It can become music. It can become an app or a piece of software that you design. It can be a book or an article that you write. It can be the name of a company or a logo for a company. It could be the design of an object such as this the original the original iPod design. Or it could be a brand new innovative invention. All of those things would be called expressions of your ideas or products of your mind. So you've taken your idea and you've expressed it in intangible ways. So those expressions of ideas or products of the mind are regulated by intellectual property law. What intellectual property law is is balanced two different interests. The the quote that illustrates this balancing the best is is by a writer American writer named Stuart Brand. He said that information wants to be free. It also wants to be expensive. So what intellectual property law does it strikes a balance between providing individual benefits and societal benefits arising from these these expressions of ideas. In terms of individual benefits it provides limited legal ownership rights to allow the creators or owners to profit from their creations. So these limited legal ownership rights are given in the form of copyright patents trademark and industrial design. There are there are others. But those are just those are examples. The societal benefits that intellectual property law is also concerned with is to allow others others being the people other than the creators and the owners to build on past creations to further benefit society. Sir Isaac Newton said if I have seen further is by standing on the shoulder of giants. So what he meant was that many of his achievements were based on the the achievements of people who came before him. This balancing by intellectual property law of individual interests and societal interests is expressed in in the Supreme Court of Canada decision of Tay Beirush and Gallery Da. In this case the copyright owner was was a well-known Canadian artist. He had produced a poster of one of his one of his paintings and a gallery who purchased the poster transferred that poster and converted it into a canvas into a canvas painting for the purposes of of resale. So the painting sort of the painter sued the gallery for for copyright infringement. The court found that there was no infringement and and and they they stated that the that the Copyright Act in Canada is a balance between promoting the public interest in the encouragement and dissemination of works of the arts and intellect and obtaining a just reward for for the creator. So the the Supreme Court of Canada specifically stated copyright law is not just about protecting the rights of copyright holders, but it's also about promoting the the public interest. The the court also went on to say that excessive control of of copyright holders can unduly limit the ability of the public domain to to to use that intellectual property to further the long-term interests of of society.