The big ISPs are trying to set up a situation where they offer a sterilized, commercialized p2p service, and ban all other p2p. The trick is implying that all other p2p (other than their approved service) would exist only for copyright infringement. This would make the customers of each ISP a captive market with the ISP having a monopoly on its subscribers' p2p needs; and it would contrive a phony excuse for traffic discrimination (opposite of network neutrality).
Of course the proposition that all p2p other than the ISP-approved services is illegal, is a big, deliberate lie. In reality, internet subscribers may prefer to use something other than the ISP-managed p2p for many good reasons:
- The people at the other end of the connection choose to share on something other than the ISP's service.
- Preferring not to pay an extra fee to the ISP.
- Well-justified distrust of closed-source applications.
- Avoiding monitoring and filtering.
Stopping copyright infringement is only the excuse the ISPs give in public for monitoring and filtering. But if they get the power, they'll use it for political censorship, political spying, price-gouging, unwanted marketing, "fishing" for blackmail material on behalf of government, and other abuses.