Er... here's the biggest concern. I'll use a simple example or two.
Scenario one, Hulu pays Road Runner tons of money for preference over Youtube and thus gets the advantage of more bandwidth and/or less latency, possibly making users trying to access YouTube frustrated and driving them towards Hulu instead.
Scenario two, Coke pays massive amounts of money for access effectively shutting out Pepsi in similar online content.
Replace with any two services, products, whatever.
This will also deal somewhat with access to services (online streaming, email, Blackberry, file sharing, gaming) that people may or may not use. This can be used in similar profiteering schemes such as texting on cell phones. Why in the world does it cost more to text than it does to actual talk? Texting uses less bandwidth and system resources, but hey, they were able to make it an added service for more money yet no added investment. Cell phones allowed telcos to bring back the old long distance use based charging rather than flat fees. From a practical view, it makes no sense. From an almighty profit view, it makes perfect sense.
Also, don't forget that tea party express meeting, Little. Paranoia forever, reason never!