Four principles of internet usage were codified (but not made law) by the FCC in 2005; these kinda represent what we commonly consider "net neutrality". In 2010 the Open Internet Order was put in place, making these principles law. It mandated three things, no blocking, no unreasonable discrimination, and transparency (disclosure of network management practises, expected performance, terms and conditions).
In 2014 Verizon challenged the order and managed to get the blocking and discrimination parts vacated. So the FCC introduced net neutrality to restore the intent of their order in the first place. There have been other such challenges by ISPs before as well, and various violations.
So, in 2015 we got NN as a replacement for the open internet order which was a legal description of the FCC's principles of network neutrality that harks back to 2005...
NN isn't arbitrary, and seeking to have it restored isn't; it's an attempt at restoring the spirit/intent of legislation, rather than how case law has caused some aspects to be interpreted.
> In 2014 Verizon challenged the order and managed to get the blocking and discrimination parts vacated
"Vacated" means these parts are no longer the law, right?
> NN isn't arbitrary, and seeking to have it restored isn't; it's an attempt at restoring the spirit/intent of legislation
OK, but the courts have decided that legislation of 2010 was not correct, right, isn't that what "vacated" meant above? So, does it mean FCC in 2015 created some rules in the absence of the law, just by its own authority - and if so, why Mozilla argues changing those rules, again by the same authority, in the absence of the law, is against the law?
> So, does it mean FCC in 2015 created some rules in the absence of the law
No, actually, the court striking down the 2010 Open Internet Order as impermissible given the FCCs citation of Title I authority as it's basis specifically pointed to Title II common carrier classification as a basis that would support the kind of rules that the FCC had adopted.
(Why the FCC resisted Title II classification up through the 2014 draft of what became the 2015 order is an interesting question, of course.)
In 2014 Verizon challenged the order and managed to get the blocking and discrimination parts vacated. So the FCC introduced net neutrality to restore the intent of their order in the first place. There have been other such challenges by ISPs before as well, and various violations.
So, in 2015 we got NN as a replacement for the open internet order which was a legal description of the FCC's principles of network neutrality that harks back to 2005...
NN isn't arbitrary, and seeking to have it restored isn't; it's an attempt at restoring the spirit/intent of legislation, rather than how case law has caused some aspects to be interpreted.