Originally Posted by r3v3r3nd
That logic is somewhat flawed. Let's say I own a toll road and I charge 5$ for one car to pass. If someone wanted to bring large semi truck carrying tons of hazardous material I should have the right to charge him more than I would an average car. With the laws of net neutrality I have no right to charge him extra and he is entitled to pass for the simple 5$ fee as well, even though his load taxes my road much more heavily and carries with it significantly higher risk.
It's the exact same scenario with net neutrality really. Substitute Verizon's network for the road. You don't own Verizon's network. They do. They allow you to use it for a fee. You use it on their terms. If you don't agree to their terms no one is preventing you from finding a different network.
Really bad analogy. You have the right to charge the truck more because it takes up more space and is heavier, which will cause more wear on the road.
A better analogy would be if the toll road was sponsored by Ford, and that any Ford cars could use the road for free while GM and Chrysler cars had to pay $10, and all other cars $5, because that is exactly what is going on here.
Verizon is fighting the bill because companies like Netflix provide services similar their own. Verizon wants to use their network to give themselves an unfair advantage against the competition.