Rohan, You fill this post with tons distracting, irrelevant detail.
The issue is freedom. Freedom of the producer. If you provide a product or service, you and your customers should be free to negotiate the price. The producer is NOT the slave of his of her customers.
Your example of the Bell System, aka AT&T, was a government enforced, near monopoly with government regulators setting rates. It was assumed that people have a right to the service.
Net neutrality, demanding only one class of service, is like demanding airlines, trains and delivery services provide provide only one class of service:
– the post office could not have Express, First Class, postcard, and package rates;
– airlines could only sell first class or business class or economy seats, but to offer a choice would be criminal;
– food markets could not sell organic, high-level and sale items, because that wouldn’t, be fair. Doesn’t everyone need food?
You are missing all the benefits of competition to inspire innovation, but that’s an economic utilitarian issues. The real issue is freedom. By providing a widely wanted product or service, why should you lose your freedom to trade freely?
No one has the right to the product of another’s labor except by paying a price they agree to. That freedom. Something our population is not learning in our government schools, aka public schools.
Rights are properly about freedom of action. See the Bill of Rights for good examples. That’s it!
Let me recommend a book that clarifies the issues: “Equal is Unfair”.