Hi Martin,
They way I view it is the owner of a network is at liberty to do as they wish with that network, they own it. If a customer does not like it they can change providers as happens in a true free market but I also realise that the USA seems to be comprised of several area based monopoly providers. Most odd for a country that call's itself the land of the free and example of a free market, when US network providers appear to have government help in making it difficult if not impossible for others to create new networks.
In Australia, we have what we call the big 4 (Telstra, Optus, Vocus and TPG), there were many more network providers but with the advent of the Australian government getting involved and creating something called the NBN (a new government owned wholesaler), all the little guys sold out and so we ended up where we where 27 years ago with 4 primary network infrastructure owners and a new government owned and controlled fibre provider.
Still, at least they have infrastructure all over the place so Australians still have choice, which prohibits companies from getting carried away with anti competitive practices but eventually I fear that we too will have a similar problem when there is once more only once primary wholesaler for network access. Sigh.
Maybe those in the US of A should tell the different tiers of their government to ignore the lobbyist's and allow network providers to operate in a true free market network without government interference, there would then be no need to consider ideas like Net Neutrality

)
Sometimes I think we humans are forever doomed to recreate the same problems over and over as we never learn from past mistakes.
Of cause, it's different in every country so that is one big plus, apart from the joint government control, namely USA, UK, NZ, Canada, and Australia - which I will omit the name of the collaboration.