> "On a more evil side, this would also stop chord [sic] cutters. Pirating content is no longer 'free', and Netflix would cost significantly more than $10/month

> "On a more evil side, this would also stop chord [sic] cutters. Pirating content is no longer 'free', and Netflix would cost significantly more than $10/month ($10/month + 'x'GB * $/GB)." Maybe you've been living under a rock, but ISPs who are also cable television providers are very interested in caps, arguably to protect their cable television business. [1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/2155286/comcast-exec-says-bandwidth-caps-for-all-to-return-within-five-years.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/2155286/comcast-exec-says-ban... This whole debate about who's supposed to pay for peering is smoke and mirrors. The truth is that cable companies have a conflict of interest between their two businesses, and they're attacking the internet side to protect their cable tv business. End of story.