One of the genuinely puzzling things about having the Feds regulate Internet “neutrality” is the total lack of attention to how this would be implemented. Remember Will Rogers‘ advice about the problem of German submarines during World War I: “Just bring the oceans to a boil. I’ll leave the details to the technicians.” That’s basically what Net neutrality regulations are all about.

Few areas are as regulated and litigated as our communications system. Lawsuits are as common as ’60s reruns on TVLand. And what does the “neutrality regulation” team have to say about this? The inevitable cascade of private litigation (and can anyone seriously argue that there won’t be?) will add a whole new level of cost to our Internet usage. The users will pay, and they’ll find the cure is far worse than the disease.

In fact, the would-be reformers can’t even name the disease. At the recent Personal Democracy Forum in New York, Timothy Karr and Susan Crawford failed to articulate what would actually happen if the laws they back are not passed. Of course, when pressed, many will name the disease: business, capitalism, the free market. And it’s a shame the online content providers are pursuing these arguments.

A recent report by Forrester, the industry-leading research firm, put it best: “Legal costs will shoot through the roof — draining the pockets of everyone involved.” And this is the nirvana the regulated neutrality is supposed to bring us?