It's lots of fun to sue people. Sometimes you can get a judge to change the law purely on the basis that (in his opinion) he understands the situation better than the last judge! But is there anything new in this law suit?
Court Brief said:
If copyright holders lose their exclusive retransmission licensing rights and the substantial benefits derived from those rights when they place programming on broadcast stations, those stations will become less attractive mediums for distributing copyrighted content,” the leagues said in their brief, according to media reports. “The option for copyright holders will be to move that content to paid cable networks (such as ESPN and TNT) where Aereo-like services cannot hijack and exploit their programming without authorization.
That's not even a legal argument. It's about consequences. Do these lawyers honestly believe a valid interpretation of the law must have pleasant consequences for their clients? If that's the best they can do ...
Or, people may simply stop watching the NFL... Problem solved. People must pay to watch the NFL, therefore people no longer watch the NFL. Want comp tickets for the Super Bowl. That is what they did in 68 and 69, just to have people show up. $5-$6 bucks to sit on the 50 yard line. Yeah, go for it NFL!!! Find out how many people really care.