Reuters reports that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reviewing Comcast’s questionable practice of blocking some Internet traffic and whether it is ‘reasonable’. Good.

But, as I have said before, ‘Net Neutrality’ needs to be enshrined in honest-to-goodness law, not just protected by the transient decree of an unelected (and largely unaccountable) commission. The Internet and companies that have spawned from it (Amazon, Google, etc.) have relied on a network that treats all data in a random, equitable fashion. Every bit and byte of information—whether it’s a news web site, iTunes music file, BitTorrent transfer, or software download—is treated the same.

Internet providers like Comcast have a responsibility to provide their customers with ‘virgin’, unfettered network access. Many Republicans claim that Net Neutrality legislation would go against their free-market inclinations, but—on the contrary—it is a neutral net that facilitates the modern, networked free market.

The views expressed in this post are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer,

Scott Bradford has been building web sites and using them to say what he thinks since 1995, which tended to get him in trouble with power-tripping assistant principals at the time. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Public Administration from George Mason University, but has spent most of his career (so far) working on public- and private-sector web sites. He is not a member of any political party, and brands himself an ‘independent constitutional conservative.’ In addition to holding down a day job and blogging about challenging subjects like politics, religion, and technology, Scott is also a devout Catholic, gun-owner, bike rider, and music lover with a wife, two cats, and a dog.