This has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.
I disagree, in both this instance and in the case of Net Neutrality, the hear of the issue is the profit motives of the cable companies working against the interests of the consumer. To me, it's part of the same issue, namely that we need to fix the broadband industry by introducing competition somehow. I believe one way to do that is to regulate them in much the same way AT&T was broken up in 1984. In particular, forcing them to lease their lines at a regulated wholesale rates seems like a good start. I believe this would introduce competition and bring down the cost of internet service provision in much the same way as telecom regulations introduced new long distance competitors and dropped the price of long distance like a lead balloon. It is unfortunate that regulation might be required, but they obviously don't want to really compete with each other. I live in Los Angeles -- one of the most densely populated and urban areas of the United States -- and I have only one option if I want more than 5mpbs. Additionally, the cost of the same broadband connection has doubled in ten years. It's bullshit.
Here is a hint, no politician needs to do anything, the people need to stand up for themselves.
Pft. Ninja please. I'd like to see you stand up against the legal department of Comcast or Time Warner. Also, an additional way that this might be connected to Net Neutrality is that stories about Jeremy Zielinski might well be suppressed by our news conduit i.e., our cable internet connection or perhaps NBC Universal / Comcast declines to ever report about this lawsuit (or any similar class action lawsuit). Should you choose to do so, it's a LOT easier to manipulate public opinion when you control the communication tubes. Personally, I sincerely hope that something (anything!) is done about these cable cos, some of the most hated companies in the world.
Also, the telcos and cable companies are often regulated by the state public utilities commissions. If more people complained about them to these regulatory agencies who do have competent jurisdiction at the moment and held the asshole ISPs to their words with lawsuits over unfair business and deceptive business practices, the entire fight for Net Neutrality would not exist.
You have so much faith in the wherewithal of your average consumer to mount and sustain a legal fight against one of the largest corporate entities in the US. I find this absurdly optimistic and would suggest that you, sir, are the ass.
Which brings me to my main point: we need to financially support Jeremy Zielinski so that we can set a good precedent.
And I think we all know how Mr. Zielinski's court case will turn out when TW's massive legal power comes to bear on him. Without fear of a powerful legal or legislative entity, TW has no incentive to treat consumers fairly. In fact, the ease with which they augment their profit with these unfair (and illegal) fees is disincentive to treat any customer fairly. I could be wrong, but I have almost no faith at all in the existing legal system to check the abuses of cablecos and telcos.
My point about the Republitards is that their opposition to net neutrality is likely to put them in the pro-cableco camp so the prospect of any legislation hampering the cablecos' evil behavior is a long shot.
Try keeping politics out of places it doesn't belong.
Try realizing that politics has a profound impact on business. Also: lose the imperative tone, your argument will be better received.