This is how net neutrality dies, if we&#x27;re not careful. As a T-Mobile customer I browse &#x2F;r&#x2F;tmobile every now and then. It&#x27;s an odd place, full of &quot;fans&quot; of T-Mobile (a concept I can&#x27;t wrap my head around - users literally have flairs of &quot;bleeding magenta&quot;!), and the net neutrality debate there is fascinating. In short, many think this is not a net neutrality violation because any service can be accepted as part of &quot;Binge On&quot; if they apply to it. It is not anti-competitive, thus, not a net neutrality violation.<p>Thing is, they&#x27;re not wrong, per se. Because there isn&#x27;t an actual accepted definition for &quot;net neutrality&quot;. For me, it&#x27;s strict - the carrier is carrying bits and bytes, and doesn&#x27;t know&#x2F;care what they are. For others, it is an anti-competition stance.<p>Here&#x27;s the problem: &quot;Binge On&quot; is great, in theory. Unlimited video! Even as a die-hard net neutrality supporter, next time I&#x27;m staying in a hotel with expensive wi-fi, I could load up Netflix on my phone and Chromecast it to the TV. Awesome. What&#x27;s the net neutrality counter argument that is equally as enticing to customers? It&#x27;s a tough sell.