Broadcasters to Encrypt ATSC 3.0 Signals - How it Impacts Free OTA TV

primestar31

primestar31

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 15, 2005
11,035
8,334
Beta Omicron Delta III
Do you have relevant documentation to support your position?
Don't need anything beyond common sense. The providers are NOT going to regular encrypt OTA signals we've always receive, to make us PAY for them. Our receivers will automatically decrypt them.

They are encrypting because they THINK people will intercept and record them. Why they think that will stop people, is beyond me, because encryption has NEVER stopped pirates for long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Justin Hill
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,341
3,216
Salem, OR
Don't need anything beyond common sense. The providers are NOT going to regular encrypt OTA signals we've always receive, to make us PAY for them.
Common sense dictates that the stations will seek to monetize their franchises to the greatest extent possible. Encryption will allow them to charge for whatever content they aren't required to offer for free as a condition of their license and franchise agreements. It is abundantly clear that conventional advertising has long been subject to a blitz from the Web (that has already decimated the print media marketplace) so it isn't reasonable to assume that the stations can reel those revenues back in in the future.

What you need to offer is references to policy as reasons, valid or otherwise, abound on both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navychop and FTA4PA
Justin Hill

Justin Hill

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 6, 2016
317
163
Green Bay
If its money the stations want, they usually get it through ad revenue. Local TV stations across all 200+ media markets are a local business like anyone else. Local stations do have the protection of the FCC and the NAB. Right now, many of those local stations do get alternate forms of ad revenue from their digital subchannels as well as downloadable streaming and weather apps. I have a feeling they'll keep the free subchannels on the lower numbers (##.2-##.99) unencrypted, while higher-numbered pay subchannels (##.100-999) will be encrypted/scrambled until the user pays the TV station to subscribe to it (some pay subchannels may be commercial-free)...
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,341
3,216
Salem, OR
If its money the stations want, they usually get it through ad revenue.
While that model sustained the TV stations through most of the 1990s, it began to break down at the end as the stations were spending millions competing with each other (The News Wars) and more for syndicated programming. With the advent of DTV, viewer's attention was being spread around with so many new choices.

DVRs and streaming services like Hulu put crushing pressure on ad revenues for the broadcast network channels. Streaming services have caused more than a few to more or less give up on live TV.

It isn't enough just to say that ads can support operations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTA4PA
Corrado

Corrado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 2, 2007
2,414
292
Hudson Valley Region, NY
Since Orby went out of business, I have not had subscription TV nor do I stream anything. When I have time to watch TV it's mostly what I receive over the air locally, mostly for convenience whether live or recorded. My satellite FTA channels and feeds closely mirror what I receive OTA at this time except for a few channels here and there.

Should the day come that the stations decide they want payment, I probably won't bother. With all the streaming services and options out there I feel that will be my solution should I pay for anything.
 
Justin Hill

Justin Hill

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 6, 2016
317
163
Green Bay
While that model sustained the TV stations through most of the 1990s, it began to break down at the end as the stations were spending millions competing with each other (The News Wars) and more for syndicated programming. With the advent of DTV, viewer's attention was being spread around with so many new choices.

DVRs and streaming services like Hulu put crushing pressure on ad revenues for the broadcast network channels. Streaming services have caused more than a few to more or less give up on live TV.

It isn't enough just to say that ads can support operations.
I found NO PROOF to back that up: atsc 3.0 channel encryption - Google Search
 
Justin Hill

Justin Hill

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 6, 2016
317
163
Green Bay
You won't win any arguments with links to a Google results page. You need to provide links to specific articles that make your point.

Chances are awfully good that none of those articles suggests that the point of encryption is to keep free broadcast TV, as we know it today, free.
I found a blog at Solid Signal that might shed some light on the subject:
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,341
3,216
Salem, OR
I found a blog at Solid Signal that might shed some light on the subject:
You need to find something that actually speaks to the idea that free TV will remain free TV. Stuart's article only mentions encryption as a justification for declaring today's NextGenTV a false start. I'm not sure what he's saying is technically true but it certainly casts a dark cloud.

Based on a skimming of the ATSC A/360 documentation, NextGen TV will use CENC encryption that is already in use in web streaming so I expect it won't be impossible to adapt at some level. Whether delivered via OTA or over the Internet, the underlying protocol of ATSC 3.0 remains TCP/IP streaming.

 
  • Like
Reactions: navychop
mwdxer1

mwdxer1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Nov 3, 2015
1,675
1,499
Seaside Oregon
Times change. Except, the rich get richer.

Rule is the “.1” sub channel must be free. I expect the others to slowly migrate to fee based. Yes, even today’s soap operas and reality shows. I expect .1 to become local news and weather.

OTA WILL NOT REMAIN FREE AS WE KNOW IT. These stations did not invest millions without expecting a return on their investment. That “free” stuff will not be available anywhere for free. But it’s years away.

There are folks in the industry that think we should pay for every time we watch a movie, etc, and this will put greater pressure against optical media. I have enough DVDs, BDs and UHDs to last me until…..

Of course, if that prediction about the world being on fire in 2023 comes true- nevermind!
I either buy or record about anything I want. I have thousands of DVDs, so tomorrow if OTA went away, I am good. Also if OTA is not free any longer, I am sure many will do without. Even here on the coast, I know several that cannot get OTA so they watch what is free on the Roku or Firestick, which there are hundreds of channels. With Pluto, Xumo, STIRR, Plex, and others, there are plenty of free programming. Yes there are ads but OTA and cable have plenty of ads too.
 
mwdxer1

mwdxer1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Nov 3, 2015
1,675
1,499
Seaside Oregon
I found a blog at Solid Signal that might shed some light on the subject:
If it encrypts, that will kill OTA TV for sure. The reason the 15-20% watch OTA is it is free. Scrambling the signal is not going to help. People will continue to watch free streaming, pay for cable, satellite or whatever. When the Big Dish signals were scrambled, it died.
One thing OTA could do is to continue to offer free OTA, but 1.0, or lower 3.0 quality. If you want the 4K or better, you have to pay for it.
Are old TV shows going to 4K? I really doubt it. Many of the diginets now are only SD.
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,341
3,216
Salem, OR
I either buy or record about anything I want. I have thousands of DVDs, so tomorrow if OTA went away, I am good.
Ignoring that your personal needs are rather unique, say you wanted a recording of the Rose Festival parade. How might you do that?
 
Justin Hill

Justin Hill

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 6, 2016
317
163
Green Bay
If it encrypts, that will kill OTA TV for sure. The reason the 15-20% watch OTA is it is free. Scrambling the signal is not going to help. People will continue to watch free streaming, pay for cable, satellite or whatever. When the Big Dish signals were scrambled, it died.
One thing OTA could do is to continue to offer free OTA, but 1.0, or lower 3.0 quality. If you want the 4K or better, you have to pay for it.
Are old TV shows going to 4K? I really doubt it. Many of the diginets now are only SD.
I'll have to see what their true intentions are for this new format for myself...until then, I'm outta here!
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,341
3,216
Salem, OR
Are old TV shows going to 4K?
That depends significantly on what you mean by "old TV shows".

If you're talking black and white, I'd say no way. Soap Opera Effect has been pretty damaging to the idea of converting B/W. Anything that was captured in 16mm probably wouldn't be worth it either.

I think we're still a long way off from seeing 4K broadcast but we could all use some HD love for the popular diginets.
 

Similar threads

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Top