Your scholar is wrong -- or he is giving the simplified explanation for children and others incapable of rational though and understanding, and you are believing the summary because it is simpler for you than understanding the underlying rational.
Ah, the classic nerd legal misconception. Laws are not software, because they are interpreted by politicians and judges, not CPU chips. Dartmouth has a fine tradition of legal scholarship dating back at least to Daniel Webster, and he knows what he is talking about. There is plenty of documention of the way that judges around the country interpret the First Amendment, and if you look, you will find that his description is the way they interpret it. You are of course welcome to interpret the law any way you want, but don't expect to impress any courts with your theories. ObOperations: Since ISPs are not government actors, the First Amendment doesn't apply unless we get intrusive Net Neut laws. R's, John PS: I used to be the mayor of my small municipality, and we learned quite a lot about the First Amendment as applied when we tried to revise our sign ordinance.