[vfclists]

What are these costs?

Are the bottlenecks at the junction between the ISP and the customer, or at the junction between the ISP and the content provider?

Did Comcast have purchase and install new equipment to boost Netflix speeds, or did they just flip a switch on already existing equipment to open some throttles?

[majormajor]

Presumably someone had to pay something to set up a direct interconnect between Netflix and Comcast to bypass the delivery networks that were used before. But more generally, I'd refer you back to my original post in this thread, about the costs coming from Comcast's lack of viable competition in most markets. Without fixing that issue, the cost is going to be what the consumer will bear instead of what the market will bear, net neutrality regulations or not.

[pedrocr]

> Without fixing that issue, the cost is going to be what the consumer will bear instead of what the market will bear, net neutrality regulations or not.

Actually the issue is quite the opposite. The ISPs backed themselves into a corner with unlimited plans. They can't raise prices based on usage so they're trying the next best thing, shaking down the other side of the connection. It's much easier to play hardball with Netflix than with thousands of customers, who may just say "well, if I'm going to pay that much for this connection I may as well cancel cable and use Netflix/torrents exclusively. So imposing neutrality at the interconnect would actually solve the current issue.