Oh, sure, you could always deny them your business -- there's UPS and DHL and the U.S. Postal Service. But imagine if they were all proposing that because people make money based on the contents of packages, it should see some of that money. Imagine if the company implied that if you or your company did not pay a reception fee ... well, things might happen. Packages might get lost, you see.

Now imagine if carriers informed you that they were going to deploy equipment that could analyze the contents of the packages they shipped. A six-ounce letter might contain a multimillion-dollar contract, while a 20-pound box might just have some intern's new laptop. Suppose their equipment could tell the difference. Would you pay to not have that contract "lost" in a sorting facility?

Of course you'd pay. You'd also pay not to have your knees broken. But kneecap integrity should not be a business expense.

This is, of course, an oversimplification. Nowadays, that contract could be transmitted over the Internet instead, and work would continue to flow. But something very strange has been proposed for the Net: Broadband providers have suggested that, like FedEx charging to receive packages, certain receivers should have to pay to receive packets. Though they've been coy about what it would mean to not pay, broadband providers have indeed proposed deploying an entire network of monitoring and censoring agents that could examine network traffic and suppress it unless a "business arrangement" had been made with the receiving parties.

FedEx would never suggest intentionally losing your packages. But Verizon and Comcast and a number of other broadband providers are gleefully declaring their intent to drop traffic, starting with whatever you consider most valuable. They call this "innovation."