The FCC has released the final draft of its proposal to destroy net neutrality. The order removes nearly every net neutrality rule on the books — internet providers will be free to experiment with fast and slow lanes, prioritize their own traffic, and block apps and services. There’s really only one rule left here: that ISPs have to publicly disclose when they’re doing these things. 
 
 In the proposal, the commission calls its 2015 net neutrality ruling a “misguided and legally flawed approach.” It repeatedly states that the 2015 order “erred,” was “incorrect,” and came to “erroneous conclusions.” Removing these rules, the commission now argues, will “facilitate critical broadband investment and innovation by removing regulatory uncertainty and lowering compliance costs.” 
 
 The FCC argues that web companies are wealthy enough to fend for themselves 
 
 The proposal also argues that consumer protections simply aren’t necessary because Federal Trade Commission will now have oversight of ISPs. “The transparency requirement we adopt, together with antitrust and consumer protection laws, ensures that consumers have means to take remedial action if an ISP engages in behavior inconsistent with an open internet,” the proposal states. 
 
 So while blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization may be okay with the FCC, the commission says that ISPs will still have to answer to the FTC, which may or may not be okay with those things. At a bare minimum though, the FTC has to be at least somewhat accepting of them — a court has already ruled that blocking those things outright would treat internet providers like common carriers; and since this proposal removes the common carrier designation from internet providers, that won’t be allowed. 
 
 Net neutrality supporters have long argued that these policies could unfairly advantage ISPs’ own content. But in the proposal, the FCC says it thinks that won’t happen — simply because some web companies are so much wealthier than ISPs. “It is unlikely that any ISP, except the very largest, could exercise market power in negotiations with Google or Netflix,” the proposal says. It also argues that small web companies need not worry, because any deal made between a large web company, like Google, and an ISP would need to be consistent with antitrust laws. 
 
 States won’t be allowed to pass their own net neutrality laws 
 
 Existing antitrust law is the commission’s answer for pretty much every problem that could come up. Why should the FCC have its own rules on the books, it essentially asks, if federal law already covers many of these things? That ignores something important, though: federal antitrust law isn’t used very aggressively, whereas the FCC could have strictly enforced prohibitions on anti-competitive behavior. It’s not a huge leap to say this change is designed to significantly loosen the regulatory leash around ISPs so that they can go off and try new practices, even if they may put consumers at risk. 
 
 And in a fun twist, the commission also intends to prevent states from passing their own net neutrality laws. Allowing states to implement their own rules, the commission says, “could pose an obstacle to or place an undue burden” on the delivery of broadband service. 
 
 The order will be voted on next month, at the commission’s December 14th meeting, where it’s almost certain to pass. ||||| Highlights: 3 things you need to know now 
 
 The FCC voted 3-2 to take the next step toward adopting a new proposal on net neutrality. A public comment period is now open. 
 
 The proposal would leave the door open for companies to strike deals that would prioritize some Internet traffic over others, but any such deal would be subject to scrutiny by the FCC. 
 
 The process isn't over — after the public comment period, the FCC will write a final set of rules and vote on them. 
 
 WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 on Thursday to push forward its much-anticipated proposal that will dictate how broadband providers can treat Internet traffic, a crucial piece of regulation that has drawn the attention of the world's largest Internet companies and a wide range of politicians including President Barack Obama. 
 
 Advocates of net neutrality, who want Internet service providers to treat all Internet traffic equally, fear that the new FCC rules would allow companies to strike deals for preferential treatment, creating Internet "fast lanes" for those willing to pay. Today's proposal leaves the door open for those pay-for-preference deals but makes clear that the arrangements would be scrutinized by the FCC. 
 
 The proposal also asks for public comment on a second, more dramatic option — reclassifying broadband service as a public utility, making it eligible for stricter regulation including a ban on pay-for-preference deals. That move would please net neutrality advocates. 
 
 The proposal isn't yet set in stone. It now goes through a comment period in which the FCC listens to everyone from industry advocates and lobbyists to think tanks and politicians. The FCC then writes a final set of rules that are voted on. That is not expected to happen until late in the year. 
 
 This is the beginning of the process. Your input will help shape the final proposals. #FCCNetNeutrality — Tom Wheeler (@TomWheelerFCC) May 15, 2014 
 
 Outside the FCC building on Thursday, protesters let their opinions be known, banging drums, chanting and holding signs calling for net neutrality. 
 
 The new rules are a scaled-back version of the FCC's 2010 rules that were struck down by a federal appeals court. The D.C. Court of Appeals in January agreed with Verizon, which claimed the FCC did not have the authority to force ISPs to treat all Internet traffic equally. 
 
 In response to the court's ruling, the new regulation would not preclude companies from signing paid prioritization deals, but would include "a rigorous, multi-factor 'screen' to analyze whether any conduct hurts consumers, competition, free expression, civic engagement, and other criteria under a legal standard termed 'commercial reasonableness,'" the FCC wrote in a press release. 
 
 That means companies would be allowed to sign deals, but the contracts would then need to be defended under the "commercial reasonableness" standard. 
 
 What Wheeler said 
 
 During his final speech before the vote on Thursday, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler gave some specifics on what the new plan entails, what it would prohibit, and what "commercial reasonableness" might mean. 
 
 In essence, Wheeler said that if a consumer is paying an ISP for a certain speed of Internet access, that company should give the consumer an open pathway to the Internet with those speeds. "If the network operator slowed the speed below that which the consumer bought, it would be commercially unreasonable, and therefore prohibited," he said. 
 
 Wheeler gave a series of examples of prohibited behavior: 
 
 "If the network operator blocked access to lawful content, it would violate our no-blocking rule and be commercially unreasonable, and therefore doubly prohibited." 
 
 "When content provided by a firm such as Netflix reaches the consumers' network provider, it would be commercially unreasonable to charge the content provider to use that bandwidth for which the consumer had already paid, and therefore prohibited." 
 
 "When a consumer buys specified capacity from a network provider, he or she is buying open capacity, not capacity the network provider can prioritize for their own profit purposes." 
 
 "Prioritization that deprives the consumer of what the consumer has paid for would be commercially unreasonable and therefore prohibited." 
 
 "Simply put, when a consumer buys a specified bandwidth, it is commercially unreasonable and thus a violation of this proposal to deny them the full connectivity, and the full benefits that connection enables." 
 
 The FCC posted the full proposal and issued a press release summarizing it: 
 
 BONUS: What Is Net Neutrality?
– The FCC released the final draft of its proposal to end net neutrality on Wednesday, and the Verge reports it gets rid of "nearly every net neutrality rule on the books" while allowing for "blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization" on the part of internet service providers. The proposal will allow ISPs to create fast and slow lanes, give preference to certain customers, and stop people from accessing apps and services at will. The one net neutrality rule the proposal leaves in place is that ISPs must publicly disclose when they are doing those things. The FCC says removing net neutrality rules will "facilitate critical broadband investment and innovation." Here's what else you need to know: