Do you have any evidence that cable companies wanted to charge for preferential treatment for traffic? I've seen that claim repeated a lot but never with evidence.
A few years ago YouTube got similar treatment on Time Warner -- they funneled everything to a YouTube point of presence on the TWC network that was over saturated. You could modify DNS and use and alternate URL and watch 1080p video with no lag.
Verizon also started limiting aggregate Netflix traffic. Through conincidence, it happened to start happening when they launched a video service.
What happened with netflix wasn't covered under net neutrality anyway (as the links above point out), and they weren't being charged for prioritization, nor were they discriminated against.
I responded to a comment saying "It's exactly like what cable companies would like to do by subverting net neutrality, give preferential treatment to the traffic that profits them most."
A few years ago YouTube got similar treatment on Time Warner -- they funneled everything to a YouTube point of presence on the TWC network that was over saturated. You could modify DNS and use and alternate URL and watch 1080p video with no lag.
Verizon also started limiting aggregate Netflix traffic. Through conincidence, it happened to start happening when they launched a video service.