This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

In Supreme Court Brief, TV Networks Threaten to Reconsider Public Broadcasting


A number of them receive a direct transmissions via fiber, microwave, etc. Although I'm sure a fair number still receive them the old fashioned way (UHH/VHF antenna). Regardless, I'm sure the networks would find a way to get 'em a pristine feed. Instead of ceasing broadcast, perhaps they would downgrade the signal (SD vice HD) or broadcast primetime a day or two after it premieres on it's HD feed. Who knows?
 
Local news ratings would take a hit, they get a big boost from primetime. How many people watch MeTV when there is fresh network programming on.
 
I agree with osu1991 to a degree. I think many would adapt, though some might go out out of business. Whatever the case, it is long overdue for some kind of overhaul of that system. But I also agree, those affiliates are not just going to roll over and let the Networks take their programming to Cable.
 
Lets say these networks do go through with their threat. Can they risk losing viewership to those that don't have or cut cable. Would the casual viewer cut the cord just to spite the networks and chose tp pirate the content. I don't see the broadcasters ever getting their way of every last dollar from the viewer.

The other big issue is the sports contracts. The NFL and MLB make big money off of the network packages. Would they decide to dump the networks altogether and go on their own.
 
If free broadcasting goes away, heck YES they will have a pirate revolt on their hands!
The one thing the networks are afraid of is the one thing they can never stop. People want content on their terms. Not when the programmers say you want it. Once they realize that using the internet as a delivery system they can cut out the cable companies all together and get even more money going direct to the consumer. They are so afford of new media that they will do anything they can to keep their current stranglehold. Just like the music industry they won't change until it is too late.
 

The law does not say where your antenna must be located. It does say you are entitled to a signal provided free from the Networks based on where you live, or where you are at the moment.
Aereo isn't providing out of DMA channels to everyone (Distants) because that is clearly prohibited. Just ask DISH. If you mean they will provide Distants to those who qualify, I would say based on the fact they are placing your local antenna where you can get locals, no. I suppose they could to someone who qualifies for Distants and who is not being served for locals by Aereo.
 
Local news ratings would take a hit, they get a big boost from primetime. How many people watch MeTV when there is fresh network programming on.

Our locals already provide 8hrs of news a day, they don't rely on the network programming as a lead in and more often than not preempt it any chance they get, and tell you to go watch it on the network website. I know many people that prefer MeTv and such to much of the junk the networks put out nowadays. Also most people I know watch dvr'd content and not live, so they are not going to watch those network shows until the weekend or the next night. I personally don't watch anything live other than football. I do watch a few things after they've been recording for 40 mins and catchup to the end but that is rare, most everything is a day or more later.
 
Sometimes it seems like Network programming gets in the way of locals news coverage....
 
My local CBS affiliate runs weather alert crawls across the top of the screen on network programming so often that I've taken to watching the other CBS affiliate available to me on DISH in my market.