Well, I was going to say no language whatsoever of preemption, abandonment, abrogation, or exchange in the 1790 copyright, but compare -- Copyright Act. But compare that to thefirst. there's Patent Act under the same clause, where there is that exchange there. The other thing, as this Court has said, there is no implied abrogation of common law rights which would be a doctrine which would be inconsistent with what the petitioner is arguing. Now --
They are comparing the Copyright Act with the Patent Act