<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Network Neutrality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://madisonian.net/2007/09/15/network-neutrality-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://madisonian.net/2007/09/15/network-neutrality-3/</link>
	<description>a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 20:32:56 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Carlos Leyva</title>
		<link>http://madisonian.net/2007/09/15/network-neutrality-3/comment-page-1/#comment-224150</link>
		<dc:creator>Carlos Leyva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:44:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://madisonian.net/archives/2007/09/15/network-neutrality-3/#comment-224150</guid>
		<description>It is not clear to me where the DOJ &quot;gets off&quot; weighing in on this kind of stuff. Obviously, they have their first amendment rights just like everybody else, but what exactly was their rationale for speaking. It is one of those comments from left field that leave you wondering &quot;whose water they are carrying.&quot; Any thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is not clear to me where the DOJ &#8220;gets off&#8221; weighing in on this kind of stuff. Obviously, they have their first amendment rights just like everybody else, but what exactly was their rationale for speaking. It is one of those comments from left field that leave you wondering &#8220;whose water they are carrying.&#8221; Any thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

