I wonder whether the primary purpose of the clause is to deal with situations in which something is published in printed form and on CD-ROM, and to resolve whether it is acceptable for a publisher to say, “Right. The legal deposit libraries will have the CD-ROMs, because that is cheaper for me.” In those circumstances, can the libraries insist on having the printed format, because that is the most acceptable one? I am trying to clarify whether we are dealing with those situations, rather than situations involving the technical choice between two different online formats, which is another matter that we would deal with in regulations about online formats. This is about judgments as to whether a publisher can say that they will provide the product that is cheapest for them to deliver, or whether a library can insist on having a more expensive format. In the context of the amendment, who makes the decision as to whether a library has the power to insist on the more expensive format? It would be useful if the Minister could respond to that point.