this. while i agree with the claim in the article on principle, it left me wanting. It is the conduct of the ISPs that is in question here. Because telephone c

this. while i agree with the claim in the article on principle, it left me wanting. It is the conduct of the ISPs that is in question here. Because telephone companies were Title II common carriers, their behavior had to be just and reasonable. Those companies prospered under such responsibilities; as they have morphed into wired and wireless ISPs, there is no reasonable argument why they, as well as their new competitors from the cable companies, should not continue to have public interest obligations. what were those responsibilities and obligations?