@ Andrew Norton
"It is good to see that at least one prosecutor is looking closely at what is, at it's basis, a first amendment issue."
Andrew, while I agree in principle that Comcast is in violation of the law, it's not the First Amendment. Comcast is not the Government, and the First Amendment only protects Freedom of Speech from prior censorship by the Government.
However, what Comcast has done is fraud, and can be construed as attempted unauthorized access to computer systems, since they are intercepting specific types of packets and forging false responses. Furthermore, nowhere in their advertising does it specifically state that Comcast will, on a whim, prevent customers from accessing certain sites, services, or protocols, and that is precisely what they are doing.
Throttle bandwidth for network management purposes? Well, as long as it doesn't go below the guaranteed minimum (which should be the speed stated in their advertising, and which is not stated, and therefor the customer has a reasonable expectation of getting the "up to" speed), manage away, by throttling.
But packet forgery is knowing and deliberate fraud and unlawful, unauthorized computer system access.
And if Comcast can't deliver the speed they have advertised due to bandwidth issues, then they should be brought up on charges for knowingly and deliberately misrepresenting a product or service for sale, which they are unable to provide due to their lack of possession of that product or service.