As the reply comment period in the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality proceeding closed on Aug. 30, commenters remained divided not only over how broadband should be regulated going forward, but also over what the evidence collected under the proceeding proves.

Comcast Corp., for instance, said in its reply comments filed Aug. 30 that the record contains "numerous economic submissions that painstakingly document the various harms" of the FCC's current regulatory approach to broadband.

In 2015, the FCC adopted the Open Internet Order, which classified broadband as a Title II service under the Communications Act. The reclassification made broadband subject to more stringent common carrier regulatory authority, enabling the FCC to enforce its net neutrality rules against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization.

Comcast pointed to papers from more than a dozen economists submitted as part of the proceeding showing the current Title II classification has generated "tremendous regulatory uncertainty" for broadband service providers, directly undercutting incentives to innovate and invest in broadband networks.

"These new economist papers leave no doubt about the deleterious impact of Title II on broadband investment," Comcast said in its filing.

But the Internet Association — a trade group and lobbying organization that represents new media companies such as Alphabet Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Facebook Inc., Netflix Inc. and Twitter Inc. — took a different view. The group argued in its reply comments the economic studies submitted by the economists associated with internet service providers "do not present any new empirical evidence regarding any negative economic impact of the 2015 Order" and instead rely on "the same incomplete and questionable empirical studies" cited initially by the FCC in its own notice of proposed rulemaking.

All in all, the association said, the record provides "no policy or economic justification" for overturning the 2015 Open Internet Order just two years after it went into effect.

While these groups were divided on what the record shows in terms of the impact of the Title II classification, they were united in their support for potentially preserving some degree of net neutrality protections.

In a blog post about the company's FCC filing, Comcast Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Diversity Officer David Cohen noted the cable operator supports "permanent, strong, legally enforceable net neutrality rules," adding that Comcast pledges to "not block, throttle, or discriminate against lawful content, no matter what the FCC does."

Verizon Communications Inc. similarly noted in its reply comments, "An open Internet is good for consumers and good for our business," adding that there is substantial agreement that "consumers should be able to access the legal content of their choice when and how they want."

Both Comcast and Verizon believe the best path forward is for Congress to enact legislation permanently codifying key protections.

Until such legislation can be adopted, Comcast said the FCC has multiple options available for preserving a free and open internet, noting the record shows "numerous parties support the use of Section 706 to establish bright-line rules." Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act requires the FCC to promote broadband in the U.S., and the FCC previously tried to use its authority under Section 706 to adopt open internet rules without reclassifying broadband as a Title II service.

Yet the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down key elements of the rules, arguing Section 706 does not give the commission authority to enforce common carrier regulations on noncommon carriage services. Thus, in 2015, the commission reclassified broadband and made it subject to the more stringent common carrier authority.

But according to Comcast, the D.C. Circuit Court's 2014 decision left open another path. Although common carrier mandates were a bridge too far, the court "clarified that the Commission may use Section 706 to adopt open Internet safeguards," Comcast said, adding that in this way, "Section 706 represents a judicially validated path forward for establishing effective open Internet rules."

Verizon, which had been at the center of the legal challenge in the 2014 case, agreed saying Section 706 provides the commission with the necessary authority to address open internet issues.

Comcast and Verizon further noted the FCC has yet another option: it can rely on the Federal Trade Commission to enforce public commitments from ISPs not to block or throttle content. Quoting Acting FTC Chairman Maureen Ohlhausen, Verizon said many of the tenets of net neutrality regulation "fall within one or more … categories of anti-competitive actions and therefore could be addressed by the FTC's antitrust enforcement."

The Internet Association, though, said relying on the FTC to enforce voluntary industry commitments would be a mistake.

"Disputes involving open internet rules will likely involve technical questions that only the FCC has the requisite experience and expertise to analyze adequately," the group said.

With the reply comment period now closed, the FCC will begin reviewing the totality of the record. If Commission Chairman Ajit Pai decides to move forward with a report and order, he will circulate his proposed rules to his fellow commissioners — and likely the public — at least three weeks prior to any vote that may occur.