[jacalata]

> I'm at least confident if my ISP started blocking Netflix because they made a deal with Comcast, the hammer of the FCC or FTC would fall on them in short order, and there would be consumer outrage.

You mean "while net neutrality is the law", right? Because that's exactly what you will lose if net neutrality is no longer required.

[jquery]

Don't condescend. My prediction for the odds of Netflix or other major site getting blocked by a major ISP still hovers at roughly 0% with the new FCC ruling. Even without Title II classification, there are other ways for the government to intervene in anti-competitive behavior (and indeed, they have). EDIT: It's worth pointing out that ISPs in general have shown much better behavior w/r/t censorship than content providers.

[wfo]

>Even without Title II classification, there are other ways for the government to intervene in anti-competitive behavior (and indeed, they have).

You don't actually believe this will happen or can be relied upon do you? There are ways for them to do it but we are at the mercy of whoever is in charge of the executive that particular year. This administration will never step in. Maybe if we get a new administration and never have a Republican in office again and the Democrats completely restructure their priorities and come out in favor of trust busting in contrast to their decades of moving right and doing favors for corporate power this is a feasible assumption.

Also, maybe ISPs will just choose to leave money on the table after they gut NN and do nothing because they really care about having a free and open Internet /s

[jacalata]

I didn't make a statement either way about likelihood of it happening, I replied to your naive hope that the FCC would still jump in and stop Comcast from doing so after net neutrality rules are abandoned. If you think that this would still be illegal, please do explain which laws and regulatory bodies would be involved and how it would be enforced. Also, it is not at all worth noting that a group who are legally barred from a behavior engage in it less than a group that is not legally barred. Why on earth would it be?