I'm not familiar with the Boston Common but I'm assuming they didn't have the resources to just buy more land in order to feed more livestock. In this situation the ISPs have the demand AND the resources to avoid over-subscription. If one ISP chooses not to, another will. The users will jump ship and the first ISP will be forced to catch up in order to stay afloat.

While I don't mind likening internet users to livestock, there is a big difference between the internet and a big field. One is a business, the other.... is a big field. Bandwidth can be upgraded at any time. Grass needs to grow.

If I'm off-base on my interpretation of the Boston Common, let me know.