ATSC 3 News: Broadcasters Set New Rules for DVRs / Gateways like the HDhomerun and Tablo

[@kumarp3074]

The only acceptable solution is NO DRM on OTA broadcasts.

[@drscottbecker3615]

1000% CORRECT! Because, give them an Inch, they WILL take a mile. Absolutely NO TYPE of ANY ENCRYPTION. Period FULL STOP

[@bobyrd74]

Sure thats what we want, but I just don't see it happening... all the freedoms we have now on ATSC1.0 are going to go away.

[@awesomedez]

If the government is allowing this encryption, then the method of encryption should be made open

[@polarvortex6601]

not going to happen. the plan is for you to pay up for your " free tv". they want total control over the user. and you know what many will comply and doing so they will screw themselves and their posterity because of something that once was free over the airwaves now will have some type of a cost. you'll own nothing and be happy!*

[@GilmerJohn]

Well, as planned the first rollout of digital TV permitted encryption on all but one of the sub-channels. So far as I can tell few, if any, actually encrypted. The idea then was the the broadcasters "owned" the encrypted channels and they could use them as they chose. It looks like they will try again with the encryption. We shall see how it pans out. I suspect that many will find that folks are less and less willing to pay for content with commercials. If you have a sub-channel that only get's 1% of the viewers as the clear channel, they may find it makes sense to rent it out to religious or home shopping, or digital network. I suggest that the broadcast model is potentially the most profitable with encryption saved for the equivalent of HBO with the majority in the clear with commercials. SAT radio started out with two competing systems and then they merged. They had a encryption model. I suggest that had they tried to have a backbone of clear channels they would have both been profitable.

[@Bare_Essence]

Yeah, right. Just like the government stating you're allowed to backup your media, oh, but not if the media is encrypted since it's illegal to break the encryption. Don't hold your breath.

[@alvallac2171]

@@GilmerJohn *gets (conjugated verb) Apostrophes are for contractions and possessive nouns, not for randomly selected words that happen to end in -s.

[@Ken-wu2bf]

Thank you for continuing to fight this for the public good.

[@reginafelangie6056]

Agree. Expressly using the language to say they are meeting it only to have it based on the current 1.0 standard and not the 3.0 is a massive smokescreen to usher in paywall on OTA content that is mean for public for free and not paywalled. It's broadcaster greed and it's disgusting. How do "they" (corporations/broadcasters) get to dictate the standard anyway? Especially given it's in their own interest and an obvious conflict of interest for them to have the say. Believe this needs some level of oversight to regulate their requirements, (not them making up their own) for companies to meet. Needs to be outside agency determining the requirement, given it's them acting in their onw best interest! Thanks for the video.

[@alvallac2171]

*is meant *own

[@JamieStuff]

How do the networks get to dictate the standard? Because they ARE the ATSC.

[@warsurplus]

One of the reasons to have unencrypted OTA signals is for the need to disseminate information in times of civil defense or civil disaster. Having content encrypted could impede the getting life-saving information to the public.

[@timramich]

No it wouldn't. Emergency alert systems are boxes hooked directly to the transmitters.

[@espressomatic]

The public will be informed by radio and cell phone. This is the death throws of OTA.

[@kriswingert1662]

@@timramich Actually, no. The braodcast is still sent out over the dedicated transmistter they use for their programming and can only be initiated by the owner. Those towers are privately owned.

[@timramich]

@@kriswingert1662 What are you even talking about?

[@dplj4428]

@@espressomatic more like the " murder " of OTA.

[@pawelgrzegorziwaniuk]

In Poland we use DVB-T2 in HEVC and we have no DRM. We can record FTA broadcast in standard TS files.

[@javidial]

The US government is controlled by companies. Nobody does anything for the good of the people, it's all for the benefit of the company who can donate to their political campaign.

[@Minimelkav]

Thanks for keeping us updated!

[@brianw3822]

They're worried about you taking their stuff, but they are going to take what little privacy we have left.

[@javidial]

The piracy from recording over-the-air content is almost none! So it's all BS. They just want to control every single aspect and never give the consumer any control over anything.

[@cjc363636]

Thanks Lon and the other voices telling the people about this. I'm hoping all DRM talk will eventually be trashed - because of 1) the Sony ruling in the 80s and 2), EAS and public warning role broadcasters have had since inception of radio 100 years ago. Fingers crossed.

[@LonSeidman]

As I've talked about previously the DMCA essentially nullifies the 1984 Sony ruling as breaking encryption is illegal.

[@cjc363636]

@@LonSeidman Darn, I forgot about that part. Before grandparents - or me, for that matter - can't watch or record OTA TV, a groundswell then needs to flood Washington with complaints.

[@LonSeidman]

@@cjc363636 The FCC is our last hope!

[@michaeltoye9666]

​@@LonSeidmanthe f.c.c.is in compliance with letting these big companies do what they want.bet your bottom dollar the f.c.c. board has stock in these media companies

[@Sam-tb9xu]

Not advocating illegal activity….but dmca didn’t stop decss and vlc being able to view DVDs

[@bbgarnettTotallyNotABot]

Keep up the great work

[@009dustin]

Thanks!

[@LonSeidman]

Thanks for your support!

[@ronguido916]

As always very informative. Thanks!

[@Darkk6969]

So they want DRM on every content including the ones stored on your DVR's storage device? Well, they can take their DRM and stick it where it don't shine. I like the idea of using HDMI encoder as it simply streams to your home network such as Plex.

[@andresmsuarez5718]

amen

[@vwestTube]

Why in the world they need encryption at all I don’t understand, this is public broadcasting not a private whatever

[@richarnold1224]

because they want you to pay.

[@AndrewMackoul]

After the industry saw what Locast was doing, that along with IPTV piracy services caused them to freak out and seek more content protection.

[@vwestTube]

@@AndrewMackoul Locast was shutdown without any encryption, I think they want people to pay for a public broadcasting

[@polarvortex6601]

@@vwestTube yup that's where all this its headed it has nothing to do with people dvr'ing their content, something that they were doing just fine because they deployed this technologies and only benefits them. this is anti consumer as it gets.

[@artdoyle9599]

Greed!

[@djthereplay]

I sorry to say this but I see the encrypting becoming a part of the standard and staying that way however, what we can do as consumers is keep A3SA's feet to fire reminding them that they cannot be doing anything to block us from viewing their signal and seeing their content over the air given that there is already a law about that on the books.

[@loopy7232]

Perhaps it's inevitable, but this is nonsense. These are public airwaves. If TV stations want to encrypt their signals on privately-owned frequencies, I have no problem with that. However, free TV is just that...free. If they are allowed to encrypt, the whole idea of free TV will go away entirely.

[@djthereplay]

@@loopy7232 That's why consumers have to keep the pressure on so that Free TV does not go away. In fact, it could make way for possible national networks that started off as cable and satellite networks to go over the air as well. We've seen it happen with QVC, HSN, CourtTV to name a few right off the top of my head. I still remind you to keep the pressure on reminding the broadcasters about keeping over the air content available to the public is still a law. They have to do it.

[@gh0stcassette]

If it's any consolation, I can't imagine the keys would be that hard to dump. If decrypting a signal requires an A3SC box, then that box has the encryption keys somewhere inside it, either baked into the hardware, in which case you can dump them and do whatever you want with the signal, or they're embedded into the signal somehow, in which case at least some of these A3SC boxes are going to jailbreakable.

[@davidbarker5957]

Thanks as always for the info.

[@joanie5812]

Tablo has a chance to get all the certs because they are owned by Scripps, who is part of the broadcasting cabal. Not sure SiliconDust will survive all these rules or fees. If the broadcasters force us away from broadcast TV will it really matter? I have an antenna that gets over 100 channels and I rarely watch them except for sports but I can live without that if I have to. Local news and weather are available from so many alternatives.

[@rholmst]

No 3rd party should be able to set “standards”. The market place should decide. The government can and should and has in the past set standards. NO ENCRYPTION on broadcasts over public airwaves!

[@joshj88]

My solution is to just feed the HDMI signal from a basic ATSC 3 tuner to an HDMI to component video adapter and take that in to recording software. Perhaps with a learning remote tool that can send IR codes to the ATSC tuner.

[@AmateurRadioEmComm]

My concern is what happens during an emergency? Loss of internet, cell, and power? Unless you have a decoder device you’re out of luck. OTA TV is a valuable part of a Comms PACE plan.

[@jeffkardosjr.3825]

The internet requirement is so stupid. A big advantage ATSC 3.0 can provide is reliable mobile coverage. You could use it in a car or out in the wilderness. But requiring internet nerfs the biggest advantage besides the video and sound quality.

[@Don-mb9fo]

I frequently contemplate whether the public will endure the inconvenience of obtaining the required devices to access OTA ATSC 3.0 channels, considering the significant investment TV broadcasters are making in DRM. The familiar phrase "cut the cord" resonates, recalling when cable costs were prohibitive, and now it appears we may be transitioning to exclusively maintaining streams and abandoning OTA entirely.

[@Bare_Essence]

And yet another reason why networks will quickly shutdown all 1.0 transmissions once the 3.0 cutover date is "final" and passed. People could still record precious money, I mean content, if 1.0 is active. People keep likening 1.0 to 3.0 as similar to analog to 1.0 and 1.0 will remain long after the cutoff date. Not quite the same situation in this change.

[@igeekone]

Yup, only applies now with simulcasting. The rug will be pulled, guaranteed.

[@onlyzach1]

They just need to get wih you Lon and have you help sort it all out haha. Very informative as always.

[@LonSeidman]

I am ready to serve!

[@marshallpoe8087]

I went to the FCC site you mention and tried to follow the instructions for comment on your website. The FCC proceeding 16-142 is not listed in the form, indicating it is closed for comment.

[@LonSeidman]

Type it all the way out and hit enter it's still open.

[@marshallpoe8087]

@@LonSeidmanI typed 16-142 and nothing shows up.

[@LonSeidman]

@@marshallpoe8087 It won't if you type 16-142 and hit enter it'll light up yellow. Also make sure you have your ad blocker disabled on the FCC's site. Might be a script being blocked.

[@marshallpoe8087]

@@LonSeidmanThat was it. I opened the FCC page in the Brave browser and it worked fine. Thanks Lon.

[@brians8664]

The argument for OTA encryption revolves around the ability to record OTA tv, remove the commercials and then distribute it over the internet. Modifying, distributing or removing decryption from DRM protected TV content (even OTA) is a DMCA violation. This is entirely about money! The broadcasters want you to pay for cable so you have the convenience of DVR. They also want to force you to watch the commercials. The broadcasters don’t want any roll your own solutions, they never have.

[@polarvortex6601]

no no no. you dont get it. with this tech you dont need to pay up for cable, the idea is for you to pay for a license or a month or even a yearly fee for the privilege to being able to access their content via encryption. the fact that you need an internet access for this gives credence to my theory. in england and in canada? they pay a yearly license for broadcast tv.

[@brians8664]

@@polarvortex6601I think you missed the part that after 2027 ATSC 3.0 will be the standard, 1.0 is sunset and the broadcasters will have the ability to block recording, fast forwarding, rewinding and pausing of OTA tv because it’s all encrypted. Their “rules” don’t apply to anything that is broadcast in ATSC 3.0 only. The broadcasters want 100% control of their content all the way into your home network. That could mean paying for a license to decrypt it, but statistically cable tv providers pay more money to networks.

[@patrickmartin4996]

@@brians8664 3.0 is not mandatory like digital 1.0 was. So, stations do not have to adopt it if they do not want. If the viewership drops, then 3.0 will be history. It all comes down to ratings.

[@timramich]

That's not the argument at all. 99% of the pirated content out there are rips from streaming services, not OTA recordings. HDTV rips ended like a decade ago. They want to stop people from broadcasting OTA signals out over the net LIVE.

[@artdoyle9599]

Does this mean I will soon be able to watch ATSC 3.0 programs on my HDHomerun flex 4k connected to My Firestick 4K Max?

[@estusflask982]

Then I'll just stop watching TV. Probably good for my health.

[@_bob_8170]

This is probably the simplest solution to all this mess. Touch enough grass for the rest of us please.

[@GregM]

It is. I watch 30 mins of news at night via OTA and that is it.

[@patrickmartin4996]

Yes, I think a lot of others will say the same thing.

[@RichardFeist]

yes, the broadcasters think their content is so compelling, we'll pay anything to get it. Nope! This will push the OTA market into hospice.

[@DRMFreeTV]

@@RichardFeist WE the viewers can BOYCOTT DRM TV!! which will have an effect on advertising revenue!

[@robertdknight]

Submitted to FCC. Thanks

[@dplj4428]

How will this work for emergency Broadcast? Not everyone can afford nor want to pay for I TV, and some people in 2024 refuse to pay for OTA.

[@impossiblescissors]

Interestingly they don't mention SmartCast. Now that Walmart owns it, we're likely to see Walmart's Onn brand adopt it, plus renewed emphasis on selling Vizio.

[@AAa-qd8hb]

DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV will fail until DRM is removed by law. ATSC 1.0 real TV freedom forever. Your old ATSC 1.0 TV video recordings will still play 100 years from now on something.

[@ZombieRyushu]

When we lose ATSC 1.0 goes dark I will consider that the end of Broadcast TV in the US. I will simply abandon TV rather than comply with DRM. I am an Anti-DMCA Linux user and I use a Linux DVR system.

[@EricCavaliere-v2h]

No mention on Linux support either, that'll break my raspberry pis I use as frontends for my dumb tvs :(

[@cmdrleto]

just watch the stations drop 3.0 quickly when their views drop by 90%+

[@patrickmartin4996]

That's right. The average person is not going to go through all of this.

[@espressomatic]

How are they going to know their viewership dropped?

[@patrickmartin4996]

@@espressomatic Ratings. The way the BCers have always depended on them. With the diginet, more people watch OTA than in years.

[@DRMFreeTV]

@@patrickmartin4996 It would also have an effect on advertising.

[@netnhamradio]

What gets me is that ATSC 1.0 had provisions for encryption that never caught on (THANKFULLY), so the feature isn't that new per se

[@espressomatic]

I have a 4 tuner HDHR Quadro that I disconnected about 1.5 years ago - and stopped using with any frequency (along with my DVR software) about 3 years ago. There are more channels available to me today than when I first set it up in 2009, but it's just not worth the time to run, IMO. I simply don't watch network TV anymore. Everything I watch is online and there's no shortage of sources for timely local news too.

[@jjones2582]

Are you still watching the OTA shows though, just over the networks' streaming platforms like Paramount+ (CBS), Peacock (NBC), The CW, and Hulu (ABC and FOX)? Our family is still highly entertained by almost a dozen of their shows (like NCIS, SWAT, Quantum Leap, The Rookie, etc), and I just can't justify spending $20/mo for all those streaming platforms combined when I can get it for free. And slightly more convenient to watch when we can fast forward through the 15 or more minutes of commercials per hour (which is, I'm sure, one of the reasons they want encryption on ATSC 3, so they can disable fast forward).

[@PandaMan02]

i thought the point of OTA broadcast was that the only connection you needed? imagine being told to watch satellite TV you needed to be hooked up to cable TV for DRM... people aren't getting antenna TV because they want to spend hundreds of dollars on TV hardware.

[@cleanup5151]

Considering that terrestrial television has been stripped of content in favor of streaming, it is a wonder what is left worth padlocking? Any remaining live sports could be shifted to paywalled streaming. May as well sell the remaining spectrum at that point.

[@AAa-qd8hb]

All OTA DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV tuner boxes are preprogrammed to stop working for DRM depending on which certification program (5, 10 or 30 years) they have. IMO. Why?

[@JavierLopezElMagnate]

Hey Lon, just recently picked up a HD Homerun 4K Flex and realized, Plex does not support ASTC 3.0 period. Apparently, they don't support the audio codec, so when trying to tune in one of these channels via plex, nothing happens. anyways... That is all. upgraded my quatro to a 4K flex to realize it was all for nothing.

[@javidial]

I'm so disappointed with Plex, they're turning our personal library into a "pluto" type of streaming app where they're trying so hard for you to start watching ads, even if you've paid for their lifetime subscription.

[@timramich]

I couldn't care less about streaming TV via a "gateway device" throughout my home. That's what my TV is for. I use such a device to record stuff, then later I remove the commercials and halftime show, and keep it for permanent archive.

[@RichardFeist]

You won't be doing that anymore under these rules, after 1.0 goes away, especially the permanent archive part. Nor will I. So I'm archiving anything of interest while I still can.

[@timramich]

@@RichardFeist Every DRM gets broken eventually. Eventually it even turns into something minor and not even a hassle.

[@j8cone]

Lon do you think the campaign by the Coalition for Local News to add fees to streaming companies is part of the DRM implementation strategy ?

[@LonSeidman]

Very much related - they want to get more money out of the streamers who are re-transmitting their signals.

[@RonGrethel]

I feel like this is already happening secretly on the back end. Because I've tried to get Plex to record the Super bowl 3 years in a row now and the recording never happens

[@rickmccarthy777]

I thought the public had won the VCR war and time shifting was allowed. Did the old court cases only apply to ATSC 1.0????

[@LonSeidman]

As explained the VCR decision is not applicable here because the DMCA makes circumventing encryption illegal.

[@dougphillips5686]

I have the solution, boycot drm stations

[@artdoyle9599]

How do you boycott what you can't watch?

[@polarvortex6601]

pretty simple solution to me. 👍👍 dont buy the boxes either ppl. there's no true reason to do this to us

[@DRMFreeTV]

@@polarvortex6601 Precisely!! let the 3.0 tuners sit unsold in the warehouses!!

[@wemelkuan]

In the Philippines, there was a TV network (ABS-CBN) that conveniently offered their own DTV box before they shut down their public ota channels. They would encrypt their own channels to be viewed exclusively on their own boxes and lock other boxes out so I hope this kind of DRM doesn’t reach the US.

[@davidhollfelder9940]

This whole Next Gen TV is corrupt: 1) tracking and paywalling via mandatory internet connection 2) limiting and controlling settings and capabilities on my equipment. 3) paying for licensing that should be public domain over the public broadcast spectrum.

[@daninraleigh]

I'm glad that I'm no longer addicted to OTA TV.

[@DIYDaveOK]

Time for the FCC to actually act and again make public airwaves public.

[@babymaker13th]

It comes down to money at the end of the!! Pretty soon we’ll be going back to cable again

[@patrickmartin4996]

With Netflix, Hulu, etc. The average person does not need OTA TV to get the programming. The local news is streamed. Maybe OTA TV will go away in time. Maybe that is what the broadcasters want?

[@dojan]

I just want a turner to connect to an older TV. I have no need for a DVR since I will only use it when I am having an issue with KZbin TV. Everything I see on Amazon for 3.0 is with a DVR.

[@nrnoble]

Speculating, the OTA broadcasters that endorse the use of encrypted signals is to point to their streaming competitors, such as Pluto TV. Pluto TV and ad-supported services have full control over viewing features, so OTA broadcasters want the same level of control. We can bet broadcasters support DVR functionality (time shifting), but want the power to turn off ad skipping and other DVR features that do not benefit them..... As to certification of devices, just look how widely adopted CableCards were; not even TV manufacturers adopted the technology.

[@davidjernigan8161]

All they are going to do is kill off ATSC 3.0 along with the broadcasters revenue stream.

[@RBzee112]

They get revenue from rebroadcast fees paid by cable and streaming services.

[@tomschmidt381]

@@RBzee112 That is true however with cordcutting that is being reduced.

[@webofhair]

My DVDR hasn’t failed me yet (VCR but recording on DVD)

[@HelloKittyFanMan]

Hmm, thanks for the update, Lon. Oh, hey, how did you get connected with the guys over at NASA Space Flight?

[@LonSeidman]

I met Chris G years ago during some of my prior NASA adventures and got to know the team through subsequent trips. Love what they do so was excited to lend a hand to their efforts!

[@squidskunk]

hey advertisers if they get away with limiting our access to OTA broadcasts that's less eyes on your products ads.

[@patrickmartin4996]

That's right, advertisers.....That may make a big difference.

[@charlespaine987]

Then time to bar any broad caster that encrypts a signal will lose any OTA BROAD CASTING ACCESS. INCRYPTION MUST APPLY TO WIRED CONNECTIONS ONLY!

[@alvallac2171]

*broadcaster *BROADCASTING *ENCRYPTION

[@knghtbrd]

Dear studios: I've bought a lot of media, but your shift to DRM'd streaming services has changed that. When buying is not owning, piracy is not stealing. Your greed will be your unmaking.

[@netnhamradio]

2027 is not a mandatory conversion mind you, it's just that after that date ATSC 1.0 CAN be dropped. In my market there's nothing on 3.0 (thankfully). TV stations that just want antenna viewers will likely not go to 3.0 as long as possible. I watch TV the traditional way, on a television (gasp!), and personally do not use a DVR, I don't plan to record much anyway, it's like with cable, you get a ton of stuff recorded that you can't choose from when you could just watch it live. It's not that hard people.

[@yobyotYT]

There's another way to think about this. Yes, they broadcasters could renege on all their promises after the transition. But it's likely that doing so would create even more blowback than A3SA has generated so far. Also, by that time, and assuming that A3SA makes good on the promises in the press release, a market will have developed for ATSC 3.0 gateways and apps. A3SA cannot simply destroy that market by pulling the carpet out from under users -- it would be something DOJ/FTC/FCC couldn't ignore. IOW, the hedge language you are concerned about might simply be masking a total retreat on DRM. In this case, I think S3SA and NAB have stumbled badly and need a way out.

[@LonSeidman]

They could rug pull and there'd be no way to stop it after the transition. If they're committed to it working this way after the transition why not just say it?

[@yobyotYT]

@@LonSeidman Of course, this is possible. But when's the last time you've seen an industry consortium say, "We're wrong. We blew it." As I am sure you know, face-saving retreats are the norm in corporations. But...and it's a big "but"...if A3SA does adhere to the Rules AND OTA devices are in the market and popular, it'd be really really hard to pull the rug out from under those users. Imagine the FCC reaction. It'd be politically untenable. Personally, I think what we saw in the press release is a retreat forced by the public pressure you and other have brought. The last thing these people want is the FCC breathing down their necks. Imagine how many more people would be pissed off if they cut us off at the kness in 202, if the transition is even complete by then. I don't think the broadcasters really want to ever transition to ATSC 3.0 -- and the FCC has messed it up with this nobody-has-any-idea-what's-happening dual transmission process.

[@HelloKittyFanMan]

"The Congress or the government"? Other than not including all branches and levels, what's the supposed "difference"?

[@Ness_and_Sonic]

Question is are they going to support Linux distros such as Debian and Arch.

[@jjones2582]

The A3SA best practices page definitely seems like a bait and switch tactic. i.e. Brodcasters shouldn't limit recordings or do anything to make ATSC3 less desirable than ATSC1, because people might not adopt the new standard. However, once it is fully adopted and there's no going back, then the broadcasters can do what they want.

[@francismcglynn4169]

Badges! We don't need no stinking badges.

[@HelloKittyFanMan]

Wow, the transition is only in 3 years? Why so soon?

[@jdgindustries2734]

Sounds like to me, we need to be pushing the FCC to prohibit encrypted broadcast on open, public airwaves?

[@dplj4428]

No DRM on OTA C over the Air broadcast.!!!

[@5argetech56]

No DRM on OTA!

[@johncoy5912]

Still waiting for Tablos 3.0 vetsion

[@bend8353]

So why do we need this again?

[@dgpsf]

Wow, they really think we're stupid enough to ignore that "as long as it's still simulcast with 1.0" -- as though that even matters. If it's still available on ATSC1.0 then anyone can just use their old hardware and have DRM-free everything, which automatically confers ALL those benefits by definition! It's once 1.0 is turned off that every one of those doors will be slammed shut... unless you pay. You'll be able to maybe watch live for free, as long as you use a "supported device" and agree to let it phone home for full analytics. Recording and all those other things (with X month mandatory 'expiration') will be allowed with a paid subscription or with your cable account.

[@dvatp]

It's one thing to encrypt content for delivery over a private network That's what the cable networks did years ago. It's quite another to pull this on a public network, i.e. public spectrum. DRM should not be allowed on public spectrum. The FCC needs to take their head out of their ass and jump on this issue pronto.

[@keithculvahouse1191]

I think it should be illegal for them to require an internet connection at all for consumer to watch ota signals

[@AAa-qd8hb]

Tell your USA Government about the Hostile Takeover of (OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV) issues listed below. OTA DRM ("over the air" Digital Rights Management) Encrypted TV Station's signals. Why? Some 3.0 tuners at this time require you stay on the internet to decode DRM 3.0 TV Stations. Why? 3.0 Currently no 4K and you only get the Simulcasted main channel and no sub channels. Channel Crawling = super slow channel changing (DRM 5 + seconds slow). No sound because of Dolby AC4 audio codec does not have a legal open source license to decode legally on many devices. Some 3.0 tuners have Out of sync audio to video problems. Private Home Networked OTA antenna tuner boxes like (Tablo TV box) can not get official certified approval for DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV. Why? You may need non OTA home pay internet for updates and to unlock DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 tv channels. Possible DRM restrictions on DRM ATSC 3.0 recordings and no viewing anywhere on any device with no sound. Emergency alert messages can not be received if DRM is blocking them. OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail because the FCC is not going to turn off ATSC 1.0 TV stations for many years if not enough people buy 3.0 TVs and 3.0 boxes. No one has solve the problem of no government money for free DRM 3.0 TV tuner boxes because 1.0 TV turners and recorders will not work after that TV Station switches to 3.0 TV broadcasts. (Range and signal error correction) OR (more sub channels and near 4k picture) trade off problem. FCC is not forcing any 1.0 TV Stations to move over to 3.0 TV. So some TV stations will be on 1.0 and others will be on DRM 3.0. The FCC is only allowing OTA Simulcasts of the ATSC 1.0 main channel at this time on DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV. DRM ATSC 3.0 is a not finished product and is a work in progress mix of unproven ideas that has never gotten full FCC approval at this time. Software updates for 3.0 tuner boxes may be needed for changes made to the unfinished and future added new official ATSC 3.0 standards modules. Patent License problems. LG no longer sells TVs with ATSC 3.0 tuners. Some 3.0 TV tuners companies may go out of business or stop updates leaving you with no DRM or software updates. OTA ATSC 3.0 is better but is not perfect and still can be affected by weak tv signals: (distance, weather, planes, trees, buildings, trucks, poor antenna, etc). FCC rules that 5 percent of old ATSC 1.0 coverage area does not need to be covered anymore = (SHORTER RANGE). Viewing zone outside of your 15 minute city or town could be blocked. Your TV viewing habits could be tracked by your serial number or IP address. ATSC 3.0 is updatable until it is not updatable without new hardware tuners (ATSC 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0......). Some of these 3.0 TV issues may be fixed over time. This is only some of the mess with DRM ATSC 3.0 TV. This is my opinion why DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail. IMO. Stay on OTA 1.0 TV until DRM is removed from OTA ATSC 3.0 by law. It is the people versus the hostile takeover by private DRM 3.0 TV stations for control over the USA public airwaves. IMO 2024. ..

[@jeffkardosjr.3825]

The internet requirement is so stupid. A big advantage ATSC 3.0 can provide is reliable mobile coverage. You could use it in a car or out in the wilderness. But requiring internet nerfs the biggest advantage besides the video and sound quality.

[@stephengiacobozzi7785]

if need the internet to get encryption to work that is not free tv

[@darknagaadventures7884]

the more they tighten their grip, the more people slip through. This just encourages Piracy.

[@STB-jh7od]

Denying TV viewers access to weather alerts, Amber alerts, etc is just plain wrong!!

[@timramich]

The EAS system is hooked directly to the transmitters. Broadcasters can't encrypt it or tamper with it one bit.

[@wilsonle61]

We got along fine for the whole history of broadcast TV without encryption. What is the rush to adopt a technology that will just make things worse?

[@mistermac56]

A3SA playing shell games again. Don't depend on the media conglomerates having news stories to expose this encryption nonsense. OTA broadcasting is withering on the vine. The local station owners want viewers to pay for watching their stations via streaming TV services or cable TV. And this whole encryption nonsense, in my opinion, is to make ATSC 3.0 OTA so difficult and convoluted as to push viewers to streaming TV services and cable TV if they want to watch content carried by local TV stations. Follow the money. I highly recommend that you research the 1984 Supreme Court decision in the 'Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.' case, in which Hollywood, broadcast networks, and local TV station owners wanted to ban home use recording of OTA broadcasts.

[@LonSeidman]

The difference now vs. 1984 is that they have the DMCA which makes circumventing their encryption illegal.. Basically nullifies the '84 ruling.

[@mistermac56]

@@LonSeidman exactly.

[@thedude5040]

ATSC 3.0 is now dead. We will have to wait 30 years for ATSC 4.0

[@MrChancebozey]

It's always so good when the greedy are tasked to police themselves.

[@1971chadwick]

Not sure how any of these new A3SA rules will help my already Nextgen certified Sony TV decrypt DRM stations. It continues to struggle with the encryption. Sony has been no help. They told me to continue to watch the ATSC 1.0 channels........Huh?

[@garyalabama]

FCC should pull the station license if the signal is not fully free and clear

[@genev7855]

Good stuff! Yea, cable TV 's bulldozer is aimed at OTA and all us little piss ants who are in their way. Perhaps we just need for broadcasters to leave ATSC 1.0 stay for us po folks on one of the sub channels.

[@barados2006]

You have it good in the USA, in UK we have to pay for everything.

[@alaingoyette7103]

Enough with corporate rules being imposed on the masses through government agencies. We are done with being forced to watch hours of commercials/marketing for reruns or lower quality programming.

[@TheAdultContemporaryMusicCh]

confused because of how long and boring your drawn out vid is, will tablo still work fully, or what wont work? i'm thinking of buy tablo 4.

[@grayrabbit2211]

Just say NO to broadcast TV and mainstream media. Problem solved. I haven't had cable TV since 2009, haven't had a TV since 2012. I've saved ~$17,000 by not having cable TV, and the extra time not being a couch potato has been fantastic. Picked up a side gig, became a pilot, bought some extra property for income.

[@jeffreykoerber6595]

They are trying to speed up adoption so the FCC will set a sunset date for ATSC 1.0 and then they will get their way with disallowing us from using content in the way we want.

[@Riker46060]

Why are the broadcasters making the rules ? Is the FCC useless ?

[@tschaller6774]

I’m sticking with 1.0 and waiting for “crap show to get cancelled” I think 1.0 will be extended and people will boycott 3.0

[@patrickmartin4996]

I think 1.0 will be around for sometime....

[@mkuhlman77]

This just sounds like an organization trying to make a fast buck before enough people catch on.

[@AAa-qd8hb]

12 Reasons why OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail. Just say NO to (DRM). Tell your USA Government about the Hostile Takeover of (OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV) issues listed below. DRM (Digital Rights Management) Encrypted TV Station's signals. Why? Some 3.0 tuners at this time require you stay on the internet to decode DRM 3.0 TV Stations. Why? 3.0 Currently no 4K and you only get the Simulcasted main channel and no sub channels. Channel Crawling = super slow channel changing (DRM 5 + seconds slow). No sound because of Dolby AC4 audio codec does not have a legal open source license to decode legally on many devices. Some 3.0 tuners have Out of sync audio to video problems. Private Home Networked OTA antenna tuner boxes like (Tablo TV box) can not get official certified approval for DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV. Why? You may need non OTA home pay internet for updates and to unlock DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 tv channels. Possible DRM restrictions on DRM ATSC 3.0 recordings and no viewing anywhere on any device with no sound. Emergency alert messages can not be received if DRM is blocking them. OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail because the FCC is not going to turn off ATSC 1.0 TV stations for many years if not enough people buy 3.0 TVs and 3.0 boxes. No one has solve the problem of no government money for free DRM 3.0 TV tuner boxes because 1.0 TV turners and recorders will not work after that TV Station switches to 3.0 TV broadcasts. (Range and signal error correction) OR (more sub channels and near 4k picture) trade off problem. FCC is not forcing any 1.0 TV Stations to move over to 3.0 TV. So some TV stations will be on 1.0 and others will be on DRM 3.0. The FCC is only allowing OTA Simulcasts of the ATSC 1.0 main channel at this time on DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV. DRM ATSC 3.0 is a not finished product and is a work in progress mix of unproven ideas that has never gotten full FCC approval at this time. Software updates for 3.0 tuner boxes may be needed for changes made to the unfinished and future added new official ATSC 3.0 standards modules. Patent License problems. LG no longer sells TVs with ATSC 3.0 tuners. Some 3.0 TV tuners companies may go out of business or stop updates leaving you with no DRM or software updates. OTA ATSC 3.0 is better but is not perfect and still can be affected by weak tv signals: (distance, weather, planes, trees, buildings, trucks, poor antenna, etc). FCC rules that 5 percent of old ATSC 1.0 coverage area does not need to be covered anymore = (SHORTER RANGE). Viewing zone outside of your 15 minute city or town could be blocked. Your TV viewing habits could be tracked by your serial number or IP address. ATSC 3.0 is updatable until it is not updatable without new hardware tuners (ATSC 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0......). Some of these 3.0 TV issues may be fixed over time. This is only some of the mess with DRM ATSC 3.0 TV. This is my opinion why DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail. IMO. Stay on OTA 1.0 TV until DRM is removed from OTA ATSC 3.0 by law. It is the people versus the hostile takeover by private DRM 3.0 TV stations for control over the USA public airwaves. IMO 2024...

[@dawn1berlitz]

the FCC could probably shutdown the DRM stuff like threatening broadcasters with revoking their broadcast licenses like most arent gonan subscribe to a provider like spectrum, conmcast, at&t/directv or dish jsut to get content though those companies could be he ones being the bully

[@jasonk5979]

The problem is that the can and will change the drm. Today your device might work. Tomorrow who knows. The broadcast have complete control of this wich sucks for consumers. Free today. Paywall tomorrow.

[@timramich]

The government needs to decide. OTA or no OTA. We either have it open and free, or we have nothing. We also should be given channels back. They had no right to sell them off.

[@Mark-hb5zf]

My spidey sense tells me to not trust A3SA folks. Sort of like when the government shows up and says" We're here to help."

[@rholmst]

The solution is simple: NO DRM FOR OTA! Simple.