> 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. I'm familiar with the Commerce Clause cases from Law School. It would be highly unusual, however, in the evolution of U.S. telecommunications law, for the FCC to pre-empt the States and then fail to address the needs. This specific scenario and concern with respect to IP-Enabled Services and VoIP was discussed at length during the House subcommittee hearing yesterday. The congressmen pretty much across the board - as well as most industry representatives - make it plain that jurisdiction existed to impose necessary mandates sought by the States - and if there was any doubt on a hypothetical appeal, Congress would provide explicit authority. Indeed, the Stearns-Boucher Bill already underscores the matter. > 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. The short answer, is that given the appropriate context, that could well occur. There are currently around ten different FCC proceedings establishing various regulations related to Internet applications. For example, the CANSPAM Act and related proceeding is one that goes specificly to eMail, webservers, etc. CALEA is an other. See RM-10865. Indeed, yesterday in the congressional hearing, every congressman/woman and every witness testified that they fully supported the implementation of CALEA requirements for VoIP and IP Enabled services. Too bad you couldn't be there to be the lone dissenter! cheers, tony