I run into this issue pretty often while reading the news and talking to people online. From my POV as an employee of a company that plays the interconnect game, albeit at a different level not a part of this debate, I have a lot of reservations as to the newly announced strategy for classification of ISPs as Title II utilities.

At the same time I think I am okay with net neutrality. It’s just that there is definitely a mission creep thing going on. Not too different than what Wheeler expressed in his Wired article about consumer protection through the courts invariably gets interpreted wrongly. As a regulatory regime, maybe this will work, but it becomes a ‘who do you trust more’ to regulate stuff issue, at least from a “which method encourages more innovation and is better for consumers” end result POV, and I’m not sold that the FCC can do it.

Some press already identified things like TMO’s free music deal as an example of what something that’s good for consumers would be not allowed under this regime.

Anyways, I thought this article sums up my concern pretty well, although I’m not that hung up on it. The problem is about just how good the FCC is at regulating things like complicated internconnect agreements in a non-monopoly, high-tech environment, and if the end result is actually something people would like compared to the alternative.

But on its face, I don’t really have a problem with what FCC has proposed. Just that I have some concerns.