part of the issue is also that netflix is a direct competitor to VOD services offered by comcast, which is where the net neutrality debate picks up.
if comcast is an information service, it has no obligation to carry a competitor's data on their network, nor to essentially backstop the netflix business model by providing the means to deliver their product or service at their own expense. it's unlikely the FCC will characterize comcast as a common carrier.
Level 3 was too agressive in their pursuit of netflix's bandwidth business, without considering the implications in their peering agreements, and now they're hoping to make this a "comcast hates netflix" issue, rather than a "massive disparity in traffic sharing" issue.
analysts have been warning for weeks now, and moreso since the streaming-only option was offered, that netflix was going to hit a brick wall as soon as the cable and fiber companies realized that they were subsidizing the netflix business model with their bandwidth and infrastructure at essentially no cost to netflix or its partners.
what this means to customers is, either Level 3 eats the cost (unlikely), netflix is forced to raise their prices (also unlikely), or comcast and the other providers will not only raise their rates, but institute caps and tiered service plans (most likely), since this is what they've wanted to do for quite awhile now but could never find a scapegoat or sacrificial lamb to offer up to their subscribers as the 'enemy'.
that's my take on it, at least. they tried to convince us that torrent traffic was the enemy, but nobody bought it, and that led to the whole net neutrality discussion. now they have netflix, and that might work for them.
one way or the other, consumers will pay more at some point in this food chain.