Those are two good questions.
With respect to the video game console—and again we do have the Federal Court decision in our favour—in that particular case, Nintendo was arguing that the games they make for that console should only be played on that console and that console should only play the games that they make, and vice versa.
This person was arguing that, essentially, technological protection measures through an exemption for interoperability would allow them to essentially play home-brew games or independent games on the box. There's really no position in any of the major video game console makers' business models right now that doesn't involve working with small independent developers to put content on their box. They're all very much in competition with each other. Exclusives in our industry are now a very, very big thing. If there is a game that should only be played on an Xbox, then there has been a significant financial investment to make that game an exclusive on Xbox, and I see no reason why a TPM should not protect that ability to do so.
With respect to the farmer, I don't know whether I'm qualified to answer that question, but I take your point.