It still boils down to switching costs. If Google pulls shenanigans often enough, some users will notice, and they switch to Bing or some other search engine wi

It still boils down to switching costs. If Google pulls shenanigans often enough, some users will notice, and they switch to Bing or some other search engine with very little effort. Google doesn't want to lose those users, so they have incentive to not be evil. On the other hand, AT&T either has a physical monopoly or is part of a duopoly of broadband in many markets. If AT&T pulls shenanigans often enough, even if users do notice, they can't switch to some other provider easily. So AT&T can be evil, and people have to accept it, because there isn't much other choice. If the capital costs of becoming a broadband provider were as low as being a search engine, regulation wouldn't be necessary. But since the landscape isn't competitive due to physical limitations, and AT&T has a history of being evil, regulation seems necessary.