ATSC 3.0 DRM Encryption

[navychop]

The FCC requires that the basic channels remain free to maintain their license but broadcasters are allowed to eliminate trick plays so the consumer has to watch commercials or they can limit recording. They could also bundle premium channels that would be Pay per view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which is why I’ve come to dread ATSC 3.0. I don’t watch live- and don’t want to ever be forced back into doing so.

And, real world, in the broadcast offices: “Let’s see, we can broadcast 4 HDish signals - or umpteen low quality ones, possibly bringing in more eyes at less cost to us. Which way makes more money for us?”

 

[TNGuy84]

Those that say, "It'll never happen" in regards to the FCC somehow limiting the free airwaves, never say never. The FCC has often went back on their promises to consumers. Remember when consumers fought to have the ability to have their own decoding equipment and we got the cable card? Now, cable providers don't even have to allow that. Cable providers were forced to air OTA content in the clear on the clearQAM side of cable. Then, they won the ability to encrypt all of that. The FCC simply bends over to whoever has the biggest pockets. That's either the cell phone companies or the broadcasters. The consumers come in last place. ATSC3 is going to suck, and the broadcasters have proven that by forcing encryption.

As for the one who mentioned about ATSC 1.0 being crap because of 8-VSB, you can thank Zenith for that mess. Just a few years after the adoption of that standard, the company went bankrupt and got taken over by LG. I guess that was their last big achievement before going kaput.

 

[LocutusOfBorg]

Keep your money in the bank.They'll either get an attitude adjustment or they won't provide the service.

 

[LocutusOfBorg]

ATSC 3.0 News

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kjj5xVZ5nY

 

[Justin Hill]

I'm not going to be worried about the DRM situation unless something really fishy happens.
As long as the viewer still has access to local programming and the programming on the free subchannels, both of which are paid for by advertising revenue, everything will be fine...

 

[navychop]

… as long as no one wants to DVR anything like they do today.

 

[Justin Hill]

… as long as no one wants to DVR anything like they do today.

...or if by some odd miracle, DVCRs and and DVHS tapes are invented (which I highly doubt ever will be), although last I heard, many TV stations still use professional-grade videocassette tapes in their video cameras and broadcast equipment...

 

[peanut1985]

I pick up 15 ATSC3 channels, 3 with DRM blocking them from my 4k device.
So which device I can select?

 

[primestar31]

I pick up 15 ATSC3 channels, 3 with DRM blocking them from my 4k device.
So which device I can select?

How much are you willing to spend? There's only TWO Atsc 3.0 tuners on the market right now that can decode ATSC 3.0 DRM.

1: Zapperbox ( ZapperBox M1 - ATSC 3.0, 4K, HDR, and Dolby® AC-4 Tuner )
2: ADTH Tuner ( ADTH NEXTGEN TV BOX - ADTH )

That's IT for now. IMO, the Zapperbox is superior to the ADTH and always will be, but it's pricey (I think so anyway).

Though, there's no hurry for 3.0 tuners right now. Next year there should be some more choices, and likely cheaper.

 

[navychop]

Or it fades.

 

[Comptech]

I wouldn't give a crap about it if I could receive our local ABC station, need the lighthouse 3.0 to pull that off. I don't watch it much, but they carry the Clemson games.

 

[Justin Hill]

With ATSC 3.0 in a test phase with at least 1 to 3 different ATSC 3.0 test channels in each market (depending on how big the market is) and ATSC 3.0 tuners and adapters in their prototypical state of development, I don't feel the need to purchase the new technology until it's readily available, is able to decrypt hidden/encrypted TV signals and is less expensive and more stations become available to viewers...

 

[navychop]

This is not a sure thing.

 

[Mr Tony]

With ATSC 3.0 in a test phase with at least 1 to 3 different ATSC 3.0 test channels in each market (depending on how big the market is)

Incorrect
They have barely even touched anything above market 100 (there are 210 DMA’s). Heck Chicago doesn’t do it yet.

 

[primestar31]

Incorrect
They have barely even touched anything above market 100 (there are 210 DMA’s). Heck Chicago doesn’t do it yet.

I personally don't think it's going to make it. Not without a government mandate, OR without them permanently removing encryption. IMO, the providers screwed the pooch by rolling out DRM so quickly, and killed their golden goose...

 

[Comptech]

I am thinking they realize they have shot themselves in the foot. They need the ad revnue, hopefully they will come to their scenes.

 

[Comptech]

WLOS here remains unencrypted but guessing they know the are hard to receive in their market. Only time will tell.

 

[Justin Hill]

Incorrect
They have barely even touched anything above market 100 (there are 210 DMA’s). Heck Chicago doesn’t do it yet.

I meant to say in the "Top 50" DMAs...

 

[Justin Hill]

I personally don't think it's going to make it. Not without a government mandate, OR without them permanently removing encryption. IMO, the providers screwed the pooch by rolling out DRM so quickly, and killed their golden goose...

I agree! Channel encryption is a stupid idea!
It does nothing but limit access to certain channels to people with access to the proper equipment to unlock those channels...
I do believe that these encryptions of free locally-originating broadcast network affiliates will backfire on their owners (Scripps, Hearst, Gray, Sinclair, Hubbard, etc.) due to their own greed!

 

[N5XZS]

Just a wasted added layer "DRM" to ATSC 3.0 added wasted of time and material known to latest TV technology world!!