Lawrence Lessig has a nice post (link here) on his blog -- and given how busy he's been lately, new posts are always welcome -- on the frequent disconnect between free market ideologues and network neutrality proponents over what could possibly be wrong with letting the big telecoms and cable companies have control over not just prices but content on the internet. In this case, the culprit is AT&T and their censoring of Pearl Jam.

1. The artist's moral right to integrity should prevent censorship by network providers (unauthorised editing of intellectual works).
2. A free market will favour providers that do not edit, remove, or bias entire works or websites (against the preference of their customers).
3. Network neutrality proponents are witting or unwitting proponents of network regulation.

Given Lessig has been a strong proponent of copyright (whilst fooling many he's against it), he's no doubt also a strong proponent of network regulation (whilst fooling many he's against it).

Moral right to integrity? Is that related to the right to truth?

Truth in attribution, yes.

It is a falsehood to present an artist's work as their work if it has been modified without their consent (to adopt the modification as their own).

Of course, there's nothing intrinsically untruthful in creating an unauthorised derivative of an artist's work, but it must be made quite clear that it is not their work (nor has been endorsed by them). And 'clear' isn't smallprint at the bottom of some obscure 'terms of service'.