As recently as Monday, Free Press released a new report on the virtues of Title II.
But with Genachowski attempting what appears to be a renewed effort to create net-neutrality rules, analysts are predicting he will use the weaker Title I, rather than Title II, to stake the agency's authority.
Free Press is nevertheless open to backing the potential proposal, even if it is not accompanied by an attempt to place broadband services under Title II.
"The most important component to get correct is the actual policy itself — the actual policy that will govern the rules of the road and determine
if there's discrimination over the Internet," Kelsey said.
He reiterated that Title II is Free Press's "preference" as a legal framework, and that its needed for agency initiatives beyond net neutrality, such as the National Broadband Plan.
But he added that "we're open to looking at any theories the FCC has for its jurisdiction."
The comments are a sign that Free Press wants to continue to influence the process even as analysts declare its favored ends — Title II reclassification — politically inviable for the FCC.
Free Press is likely to have high expectations for the language in the the policy itself.
When House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) proposed a net-neutrality framework in September, some public interest groups signed on, with the exception of Free Press. The group said Waxman's outline was too watery.