[rayiner]

This has nothing to do with the cable companies. It's the broadcast networks, who actually make the content that people want to watch. Internet-types like Aereo and Youtube have been trying to free-ride on their efforts for a decade now, getting viewers by distributing content they didn't create. And when the content creators legitimately complain about it, the internet-types paint them as "holding back progress."

[mal-2]

By owning and using broadcast spectrum, these content providers are in a unique position in the market. By broadcasting for free over the air, they have the privilege of reaching huge audiences easily. The fact that nowadays most people don't use an antenna isn't particularly relevant, because the content providers grew and achieved dominance due to the ease with which their viewers could tune in. Their entire business model is based on being able to charge outrageous prices for advertisements because they reach a /large audience/.

Now, they're trying to have it both ways. The intent of public broadcast is to operate for the 'public interest, convenience and necessity.' The entire purpose of broadcast television is that it's broadcast freely and accessibly. If they don't like that model, and think they can be more successful through a closed system, they of course have every right to give up their broadcast spectrum and sell their content elsewhere, rather than offering for free. What they can't do is pretend that their content deserves to be available for free OTA but somehow comes at a premium if delivered through any other means. If they make that argument they are dragging their feet and refusing to meet the intent and spirit of broadcast television.