User blog comment:Kefke Wren/Today, I am an Activist/@comment-5594403-20130911140140/@comment-4332975-20130911155243

I have sources. The trick is, which ones would you consider credible? I can tell you that Verison has gone to court against the FCC over their right to have the kind of pricing system I'm talking about.

They ramble a bit, but here's the story on it from National Public Radio.

Here's a summary of the rules Verison was fighting against.

More to the point, though, far from unlikely, companies restricting access to content based on what's best for them is already happening. I'm trying to take articles from a diverse list of sources, so I can show it's not just one alarmist network showing this trend.

[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121720316961088595.html From the Wall Street Journal: A case in which Comcast did slow users bandwidth on content that they didn't like. The FCC ruled that it was unacceptable...] (Comcast later challenged the ruling and won.)

Here's a CNET article about a phone company trying to block access to VoIP services.

I have this article from WIRED here, about how two companies involved in providing AT&T and Verizon's internet service showed off their plans for a tiered internet.

Oh, and if you're wondering how important an open internet really is, here's what some fine folks at Harvard had to say, after looking at the examples set by other countries:

"The most surprising finding in our analysis is that open access policies contributed to the success of many of the highest performers during the first broadband transition, and as a result are now at the core of future planning processes in Europe and Japan. Contrary to perceptions in the United States, there is extensive evidence to support the position, adopted almost universally by other advanced economies, that open access policies, where undertaken with serious regulatory engagement, contributed to broadband penetration, capacity, and affordability in the first generation of broadband."