[1] Some opponents of net neutrality believe such internet regulation would inhibit innovation by preventing providers from capitalizing on their broadband investments and reinvesting that money into higher quality services for consumers.
Supporters of net neutrality argue that the presence of content restrictions by network providers represents a threat to individual expression and the rights of the First Amendment.
In 2009, FCC Commissioner Julius Genachowski revamped these principles by adding the idea that internet service providers may not discriminate against content in any way.
Because the FCC had previously chosen not to classify broadband providers as a telecommunications service, the court ruled them exempt from treatment as common carriers.
[12] The current proposal for Open Internet was opposed by the FCC's two Republican officials, Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker.
If vigilantly and vigorously implemented by the Commission — and if upheld by the courts — it could represent an important milestone in the ongoing struggle to safeguard the awesome opportunity-creating power of the open Internet.”[14] FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski also supported the decision, invoking the actions of the past Republican administration.
He said that "The rules of the road we adopt today are rooted in ideas first articulated by Republican Chairmen Michael Powell and Kevin Martin, and endorsed in a unanimous FCC policy statement in 2005.
[8] President Obama voiced his support for the measure as well, "calling the FCC's decision a victory for consumers, free speech, and "American innovation.
[16] On January 14, 2014 in Verizon v. FCC the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the "No blocking" and "No unreasonable discrimination" rules of the order.