It seemed that the SCOTUS decision punished Aereo for not paying re-transmission fees. I really didn’t see anything in the decision that said transmitting content anywhere was wrong. So if Aereo somehow negotiated with their broadcasters, their service would be legal, despite it being able to send a NY signal to someone on vacation in LA.
Interesting point @snowcat, How would you say that is different from someone taking their satellite dish with them from NY to LA and watching NY stations? Seems to me it should be ok. But, honestly the way broadcasters have been so against streaming content even when you have a paid subscription I am sure they would dislike that.
I was researching what RVers do. It seems that when they go to another part of the country, they just call up the satellite provider and change their address to the local one. They can’t pick up their original signal if they go too far since satellite uses a spotbeam for that area.
I also didn’t realize that no one except FOX has really legally challenged Slingbox-type technology. The main argument for its legality is that it is streaming from a single device to a single user account. Time-shifting is definitely legal, and this is just “place-shifting”.
That’s interesting you say that, my parents used to travel all around and never called DirecTV, but maybe they didn’t go far enough 
Then again, they are allowed to have both East and West coast feeds.
@Jestep it only affects the local channels broadcasted via spot beams.
Some markets are carried nation wide (not on spot beams) to serve extreme rural customers that are not served by local broadcasters. Then the customer can choose New York or LA market for example if not served at their location.