[removed by moderator]

Our pending Wichita KS license poses an interesting problem... do we ATSC 1.0 or ATSC 3.0?

Is that set in stone as part of the paperwork, or can you change with sufficient notice? Despite the long-term uncertainty of 3.0, there certainly aren't many 3.0 LPTV stations around.

It requires ...

nickk wrote: Thu May 21, 2026 3:57 pm Our application for CH20 in Wichita just got assigned a call sign! K20PL-D

any idea nick, of what channels you plan to carry on the silicondust LPTV network if I can mention it.

What does this mean to a consumer?


It won't have much of a direct impact, but it gives Silicondust another seat at the "table" to also be a broadcaster. It also gives us valuable experience that will help the HDHomeRun-side of things (special testing, trying ATSC 3.0 features that other ...

If a network decided to do an encrypted channel that required people to buy a converter box to view, that is not considered broadcasting under FCC policy. There is no ambiguity.

If all 4 networks decide to encrypt their primary channels, informing TV manufacturers that they have to build the ...

...It also remains unclear if tuners will be able to work with third-party DVR software, such as Plex and Channels. For those reasons, ATSC 3.0 might remain toxic among tech enthusiasts even as the DVR options improve.

Unclear? The ONLY "third party" dvr software that handled DRM was Windows ...

I'll reiterate that, for me, this functionality isn't high on my list of desired features. Now, if DRM was removed from some of the IP channels in my area that would change overnight.

I'll also echo what the previous posters suggested above - if there's a way to allow the user to opt-in I think ...

according to the last video uploaded to you-tube lon seidman revealed some good news regarding drm and the broadcasters, nab, pearl and the a3sa are going to have to answer some hard questions from the fcc with regard to encryption among other things.

joblo wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 12:43 am

roadhazard wrote: Tue Sep 02, 2025 8:04 am

Steady as she goes... https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-789A1.pdf

looks like that roadhazard is looking for a wreck.

anyone been stockpiling movies or tv progs?

Sounds like racketeering to me.

Pay up competitor because it would be a shame if you're suddenly unable to broadcast. Would be a terrible if no one could see your channel!

How can this possibly be legal?


IT IS....

not legal, it is blackmailing a practice used by the mafia.

UNLIKE DRM ...

nickk wrote: Thu Aug 07, 2025 6:34 am howardc1243 - do you mean AntennaMan rather than Lon?

you're right nickk it was antennaman - sorry.

I've read much hand-wringing about DRM causing concern during emergency situations. But I cannot fathom the issue. If there is an emergency the broadcasters can always turn DRM off. Pure ATSC 3.0, no certificates, no internet required. Then they turn DRM back on after the emergency is over ...

I've read much hand-wringing about DRM causing concern during emergency situations. But I cannot fathom the issue. If there is an emergency the broadcasters can always turn DRM off. Pure ATSC 3.0, no certificates, no internet required. Then they turn DRM back on after the emergency is over ...

they basicly can... hevc came out in April 2013.
so figure in 2015 and newer tvs can handle hevc. He also specified any of those tvs that dont come with tuners can handle atsc3.0 with a tuner like hdhomerun... as long as no drm


Exactly - that was the whole point of that section of my ...

if nickk can show and i believe nickk can show that there is collusion between pearl and a3sa to keep gateway devices from decrypting the signal then the next step would be to involve the legal system.
Pearl was a founding member of A3SA. I'm not sure one can collude with themselves.


it can ...