Net neutrality regulations were adopted to protect (and in some degree restore) the net neutrality condition; the internet was largely neutral from its inception; though by the early 00s threats to neutrality in practice were becoming clear, and the FCC began discussion the issue, adopting open internet principles that it first attempted to promote via case-by-case action (which was limited by the courts), then Title I regulation (which was struck down by the courts) in 2010.
There's considerable reason to believe that even without enforceable rules, the attention and active policy activity directed at enforceable rules inhibited non-neutral action by ISPs compared to what it would have been without that activity.
> So to say that Net Neutrality has been key to an open internet from 1980-2015 seems without merit.
To say net neutrality regulations have been would be without merit, sure. To say net neutrality has been, OTOH, is factually true.
So if I understand your point here, it's basically that ISPs had an informal "code of conduct" if you will, that "All packets are created equal." That this was an informal contract with the users that everyone tacitly agreed to - what you state as a condition.
Starting in the early 2000s however some groups started breaking that informal contract and the goal in the early 2000s was to codify that into law.
So "net neutrality" in this case is trying to make a formal system out of what would be considered common law.
They didn't change. They bought eachother and squeezed out competition out until their influence was more powerful than the consequences of playing unfairly. A long long time ago, you could choose between dozens of ISPs. That is no longer true.
I think what changed is streaming services - huge and costly (to the ISP) bandwidth hogs which are just asking to be extorted because they make money on their content.
Maybe it's also a matter of competition with cable TV - if Comcast reduces Internet service prices and takes the money from Netflix instead, Netflix will have to rise their prices and be less competitive?
There's considerable reason to believe that even without enforceable rules, the attention and active policy activity directed at enforceable rules inhibited non-neutral action by ISPs compared to what it would have been without that activity.
> So to say that Net Neutrality has been key to an open internet from 1980-2015 seems without merit.
To say net neutrality regulations have been would be without merit, sure. To say net neutrality has been, OTOH, is factually true.