Tony, Let's take the last point first. It's very common for the federal government to preempt all the states and itself impose no rules in the particular area that a state cares about. That's what the dormant commerce clause is all about. There's a famous "mud-flaps" story -- a state wants to say, for safety reasons (it claims), that any truck passing into its territory has to have a certain kind of mud-flap above its wheels. But that's getting in the way of interstate commerce, so the federal government can preempt that rule -- even without itself making a standard about mud-flaps. Here, Section 230 says "unfettered," and that's the Congressional policy. No state can get in the way of that policy. Second -- in fact, the FCC's ancillary jurisdiction is limited to those things that are "necessary" to carry out its statutory mandates. And there will certainly be a fight about how necessary it is to reach email, IM, web servers, and all the rest. Carried to the extreme, your argument would have to be that any service that uses "communications" is subject to FCC rules. Well, I routinely pay bills online using "communications." I routinely read the newspaper online. Does that mean that FCC can make rules about banking or journalism? I think the Title I jurisdiction question is central. Litigation isn't poetry. Best, Susan