As I said in 1996 accessing Distants had no restrictions. Then FOX Miami made an issue of Distants and brought the issue to head. A pivotal decision was made which started restricting access to Distant stations.
A court decision. The copyright owners asserted their rights and a court decided that the satellite companies were infringing on the rights of the stations and networks. In response to the court decision that would have prohibited any rebroadcast without an agreement between the station and the satellite company, laws were written that addressed the copyright concerns and permitted carriage, despite the objections of the stations and networks.
James is providing the justification (for the benefit of our reading audience) I referred to. Note the language James used, which I originally referred to as “Banned”:
- “do not allow importing a signal from another market”
You missed it ... "do not allow" is not the same as "prohibits". A ban would come from a prohibition. Permissive laws that allow carriage under certain laws are not a ban.
I get the fact that technology advanced to the point where companies gained the capability to deliver Distants.
Actually technology has advanced to the point where companies gained the capability to deliver every local station into each local market. DISH is now able to deliver local channels to all markets - wherever a satellite dish can be installed. Part of the cost is that the locals are delivered by spotbeam ... a limit of the technology that means I cannot watch Seattle locals in Indiana or Florida locals in Wyoming. In order to deliver a set of locals to the entire US the channels must be on ConUS transponders. The more space used on ConUS transponders for locals the less space that is available for other channels.