I'm having trouble blaming them for the out-of-band services exemption. That seems unavoidable to me as the alternative leads to absurdities. How would you tec

I'm having trouble blaming them for the out-of-band services exemption. That seems unavoidable to me as the alternative leads to absurdities. How would you technically define "neutrality" between a digital TV service and its piggybacked internet connection? If the provider wants to allocate enough bandwidth for a specific quality video signal and use the rest for IP, is something wrong with that? Are they supposed to throttle the video signal to match the quality of Youtube? Even if they use IP for the TV service, it's still going to blow away any competing service that has to traverse the public internet and I don't see any sensible way the ISP could avoid that. And it gets really weird when you look at internet over analog services, like DSL and cable modems. The best you can do is force them to treat all IP traffic equally. Then they can't cripple Youtube or Skype without crippling the entire internet. The next least heavy-handed thing I can think of doing is simply forcing all digital services onto the public internet, which would be neat but a bit too ambitious.