That is definitely not the agreed upon definition of net neutrality today. Comcast is allowed to offer different classes of service (e.g. speeds) to different people. It is allowed to ban you for violations of terms of service (e.g. illegal downloads). It is allowed to impose data caps. None of these are against Obama-era net neutrality rules. It can't do any of these, however, to the websites it serves you.
>That is definitely not the agreed upon definition of net neutrality today. Comcast is allowed to offer different classes of service (e.g. speeds) to different people. It is allowed to ban you for violations of terms of service (e.g. illegal downloads).
That's because net neutrality does not exist today. Like I mentioned in my first comment, there are no NN laws in the US.
NN has long stood for the principle of dumb pipes, regardless of you being the sender or receiver.
You edited one of your earlier comments to mention the 2019 NN law that passed in the House; I encourage you to go read that law, as it specifically strengthens consumer protections in regards to ISPs and makes it so that Comcast could not refuse to serve you based on whatever arbitrary restrictions they want. If you are downloading torrents illegally, they could ban you. But under NN, they could not ban you because you were, for example, sharing legal content that Comcast employees have political disagreements with.
