Comcast vs Net Neutrality

So apparently Comcast won a court case whereby it was determined that Comcast has the right to restrict internet traffic that traverses their network.  There are at least several viewpoints on this, but I'm focusing on two in particular: (1) Comcast is offering the service, owns the equipment providing the service, and has every right to set forth the terms of use for that service.  If customers don't like the terms of that service then they can get internet service from another company (if available) or do without.  (2) Comcast restricting traffic that traverses their network is censorship.  Everyone except the Chinese government knows that censorship is evil.
I can honestly say that I see and understand both viewpoints.  Comcast wants to protect their investment and offer adequate levels of service to all their customers.  In particular, BitTorrent traffic apparently places an undue stress on their network and hampers the adequacy of service to other customers on their network.  The move to block BitTorrent traffic is a protective mechanism.  But customers want free reign over what they can do on the public internet.  The internet is public and (supposedly) largely unregulated.  Paying for access to this public medium entitles people to use it as they wish within the laws of the land set forth by the government.  This free reign is unrestrictive and the most desireable scenario.  (Like I said, censorship is evil.)

It's a battle between what customers want and what service providers offer.  Customers aren't going to do without the service, and if providers are few there isn't much choice for the customer.  I see two possible conclusions that I can draw about Comcast.  First, Comcast is being a dick to its customer base.  It either has a god complex or some underlying motive to extort money from customers through all of this.  But I'm usually the type of person to give the benefit of the doubt in most scenarios, and I will do so here.  I defer to my second possible conclusion, and that is that Comcast has an inadequate infrastructure to handle the traffic generated by their customers.  They've provided more offerings than they can support, and are now restricting their offerings so they can provide service to their too-large customer base.

According to Comcast's SEC filing on February 23, 2010, Comcast had a net income of $3.638 billion in 2009, an increase of 42.8% from 2008.  Now with a debt of $29.1 billion I can understand that Comcast might want to spend money paying that off.  In fact, they apparently reduced their debt by $3.4 billion in 2009 according to the filing.  At the same time I'd like to think an investment of even part of that $3.638 billion net income in infrastructure upgrades would allow for happier, unrestricted customers more willing to give their money to Comcast for internet service.  But that's just me.

What do you think?