Maybe there are two sides to this argument
There are. One of them is a greedy and abusive minority sucking in the ignorant with lies.
as with any "open access" to a resource
Network bandwidth isn't open access.
The challenge for an ISP or telco is to strike that balance between reasonable pricing and protecting the reasonable majority from a handful of excessive users
That's not a challenge for anyone. Congestion avoidance is a solved problem, an automated algorithm, _the_ automated algorithm that picks what to send or drop next. If "excessive users" are interfering with anybody else, causing that interference was an explicit choice by the ISP.
I really don't think his value to humanity consists of him spending his airtime talking about what self-entitled theocrats and oligarchs and warlords and just plain kleptocrats want him to talk about. I think his value to humanity consists of him spending his airtime talking about what they _don't_ want him to talk about, because he's one of the few people who actually know that stuff first-hand.
Murder requires intent to kill
A person is presumed to intend the reasonably foreseeable consequences of his voluntary act
[Technically,] cases that involve negligence or reckless disregard for safety [...] are NOT "murder"
Yes, they are. The line between manslaughter and murder is "behaves in a way that shows extreme, reckless disregard for life and results in the victim's death".
After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access cover has been removed.