 one of the components of the section that I am actually not terribly familiar with. Okay, fair enough. Let's see, who else? The library may have an opinion on that. Sure. So first of all, I think with respect to red flag knowledge, I think the courts have interpreted it correctly. The office acknowledges that it's by changing the red flag knowledge standards as they're suggesting, it could very well require notice and stay down, i.e. filtering of some sort. So that would move towards an EU model that really would have very serious First Amendment issues. So this is an area where just utter changes could have, as you suggest, very serious unimportant consequences. And again, the report itself acknowledges that changing the red flag knowledge standards could very well lead to, as a practical matter, a filtering of requirements. For the bigger platforms, that's not a big problem. For the smaller platforms, that could be very serious issues. Certain libraries, if they needed to start doing that, that would be very costly. But also it could have various impacts on users. I see my time's up and I have a lot of other questions. I want to thank the Copyright Office for the work it's put in. And just note that I do think copyright modernization is going to advance the cause of compensation for artists. It's not going to solve all the problems, but it is going to be a huge help for artists and creators in getting paid for their work. And I will defer other questions to my written opportunity and thank each and every one of the witnesses for being with us today and sharing their perspective. I yield back.