Can we get that in writing?

With the CRTC set to decide on the future of internet regulation in Canada, Rogers and other ISPs are looking to avoid paying into a fund to support the generation of Canadian content. But their explanation for doing so doesn't exactly fit with their past practice:

Broadcasters and cable companies - again, to no one's surprise - oppose any form of regulation.

Cable companies argue it would be illegal to make the Internet service arms of their companies pay for content - and they have official legal opinions that say so.

"We're a dumb pipe," says Ken Engelhart, senior vice-president of regulatory for Rogers Corp. "We don't know what you're downloading . . . so how can we be responsible for the content?"

Now, Englehart's assertion looks downright laughable given Rogers' history of content throttling or traffic shaping. But can we all agree that it would be a reasonable outcome if Rogers and other ISPs avoid any new levies in exchange for their binding agreement to act as "dumb pipes" rather than controlling what content is available to Canadian users?