Hello All, In 2002 I wrote an article in Telecommunications Policy entitled Revenge of the Bellheads: how the Netheads lost control of the Internet. The article asserted that as the incumbent telephone companies largely owned and operated the Tier-1 ISPs and the associated transmission networks, they had the power to set Internet commercial policy. At some not too distant future date owners of a "one size fits all" IP centric (a bit is a bit) network might have even greater control over what traverses their pipes. In a deregulated or unregulated environment arm's length negotiations do not typically result in unlawful discrimination. Fair enough. But what about anyone--consumers included--who have no negotiation leverage and cannot alter unilateral terms and conditions, including ones that ensure that a telecom pricing model applies where an All You Can Eat Internet model previously applied? I agree that Title I of the Communications Act offers a vague and undisciplined outlet for the FCC to remedy "unlawful" discrimination. I also don't think the FCC should engage in price regulation. But if the future IP marketplace is dominated by two players splitting 95% of the market (cable and telco) what prevents Mr. Whiteacre and his Bellhead colleagues from calling the shots from a Bellhead template?