Common carriage is an ancient idea being applied to a modern problem -- Internet access

Excerpts from Justinian's "Digest" of Roman law suggest that 6th-century sea captains, innkeepers and liverymen could not refuse board to any cargo, man or horse. William Blackstone, in his 18th-century "Commentaries on the Laws of England", was more explicit: to open a house for travellers implied "an engagement to entertain all persons who travel that way". English common law came to see innkeepers, boatmen, warehouse owners and granary operators as "common carriers": transport trades compelled to serve all comers, and to charge reasonable rates.

Telecoms operators argue that America does not need common carriage for Internet access, because the country's unique network of local cable monopolies competes against its last-mile copper-wire monopolies. True, the promise of high returns has encouraged Verizon, a telecoms giant, to build fibre networks in some densely populated areas without government subsidy. But in practice America's regulatory approach has left much of the country with a cable monopoly for truly fast broadband access. The single largest reason given for failing to purchase broadband access in America is price, and many non-adopters are stymied by hardware fees, a lack of billing transparency and the extra cost of bundled services that providers often add to Internet access. The Federal Communications Commission's current plan—to ask last-mile providers to subsidize rural service, and to ensure equal treatment of packets of information—is a mild intervention by global standards. America's modern-day common carriers should count themselves lucky.