Encryption

[freway01]

If the device has to get the content from the internet anyway - just publish the URLs on a known Internet site

Local stations only have the right to show network and syndicated programming in their viewing area, which is why the live streams on their websites only carry newscasts, local programming and other filler. Publishing stream URLs that carry all of the programming they broadcast OTA out in the open would let anyone across the country access it as it's impossible to apply state or DMA specific IP geoblocking on the streaming server level when the IP addresses used by most wireless providers resolve to one of their national data centers instead of your city. Not to mention it would invite lawsuits from companies who hold the out of market rights to regionalized programming like NFL games and syndicated sports.

most important is silicondust can in a firmware update may allow gateway devices an option to ignore content urls if a user doesn't want to be bothered with them.

nickk,
You've been in the discussions with the ATSC and A3SA groups on the standard, it's capabilities, how it will work, and all of the requirements. Seems to be a lot of discussion here on the use of the internet. You stated previously that an internet connection will be required to start playback of any DRM protected recording. Can you provide a little clarification on the 'internet' connection and its use?
1. An internet will be required to start playback of any DRM protected recording, will it be required for live viewing?
2. If an internet connection is not available, will a consumer be able to view and/or record ATSC 3.0 broadcasts?
3. Will encryption/DRM always be on?
4 Other than for security validation, what will the internet connection be used for?
5. Is there a site or document people can go to and read how ATSC 3.0 will work, all of the requirements, and any timelines?

[nickk]

1. An internet will be required to start playback of any DRM protected recording, will it be required for live viewing?

Yes, required to view live as well.

2. If an internet connection is not available, will a consumer be able to view and/or record ATSC 3.0 broadcasts?

Record - maybe, view no.
For record the open question is if we can record content when the stream doesn't tell us the DRM restrictions so we don't know if recording is allowed or not without internet.

3. Will encryption/DRM always be on?

That is up to each TV station. From what we have seen stations that have turned on DRM have kept it turned on 24/7.

4 Other than for security validation, what will the internet connection be used for?

Just that - obtaining the license to decrypt the content.

5. Is there a site or document people can go to and read how ATSC 3.0 will work, all of the requirements, and any timelines?

ATSC 3.0 specs are public, A3SA specs are not. DRM is A3SA.

[davidmb]

How is A3SA able to prevent the recording of any of the OTA (free public airwaves) programming if the courts have already ruled that consumers can record content for personal use? Isn't this the same reason we have DVR's today?

https://legalbeagle.com/6696968-tv-reco ... -laws.html

The thing is, an approved device would be able to record the shows, but those files would have to be stored in an encrypted state (is my understanding). This means that watching it via Channels (stand alone) app or via Plex would be prevented but one using HDHR subscription or Channels DVR subscription would be able to view it (as long as they have the original hardware used to originally record it). If one wishes to upgrade their hardware then any old recordings would then be rendered unusable. So they technically are not preventing the recording of shows. Just prohibiting where those recorded shows can be watched.

[freway01]

How will consumers who don't have or can't afford reliable internet, be able to watch TV?

[nickk]

How will consumers who don't have or can't afford reliable internet, be able to watch TV?

Televisions with ATSC 3.0 support can watch without internet, although they still authorize via the internet if internet is available.

The industry talk we hear about adoption is focused on televisions and live TV.

[Cabal]

For record the open question is if we can record content when the stream doesn't tell us the DRM restrictions so we don't know if recording is allowed or not without internet.

It seems like one could do that now, even though the data would not be useful. The whole point of (this) encryption is that the data at rest isn't accessible.

[Freekick123]

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search- ... 3087617098

I don't think Lon and Tyler posted this. It doesn't help.

[decaym]

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search- ... 3087617098

I don't think Lon and Tyler posted this. It doesn't help.

Not sure this has any relevance here, but the people over on AVS Forum's ATSC 3 thread are likely to be interested.

[Freekick123]

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search- ... 3087617098

I don't think Lon and Tyler posted this. It doesn't help.

Not sure this has any relevance here, but the people over on AVS Forum's ATSC 3 thread are likely to be interested.

There are posters a few pages back asking people to comment and sign Lon's petition and place a comment in the FCC docket to stop DRM.

[OcalaGator]

It seems to me that this is basically the worst of all worlds. Call me a cynic but I don't believe this will ever work; A3SA will continue to string everyone along, pile on more onerous and impossible to meet demands until the towel is thrown in.

[freway01]

It seems to me that this is basically the worst of all worlds. Call me a cynic but I don't believe this will ever work; A3SA will continue to string everyone along, pile on more onerous and impossible to meet demands until the towel is thrown in.

Go back in this thread and look at some of the posts that have links you can go to and support Lon Seidman's petition to the FCC (https://lon.tv/atsc3petition). Go out and add a comment by going to 'https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express' and file a comment. Just fill in the 'Proceeding(s):' box with 16-142, then the rest of the boxes with your information. If you're not sure what to put in the comments box, you can go out and look at some of the other comments people have submitted by going to 'https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings', enter '16-142' in the 'Proceeding(s) box, press the 'Tab' key, then press the 'Enter' key. Basically letting the FCC know why allowing the broadcasters to control our 'free & public' airwaves through the use of encrypted signals is bad for consumers.

After you do that, send an email to your Congressional Representatives letting them know what the broadcasters are trying to do to prevent Americans from watching the free, over-the-air local TV broadcasts in the way we are able to do today.

[jdwinner]

FCC Federal code 47 CFR 76.1904 states:

(a) Commercial audiovisual content delivered as unencrypted broadcast television shall not be encoded so as to prevent or limit copying thereof by covered products or, to constrain the resolution of the image when output from a covered product.

[kyl416]

CFR Part 76 where you got that quote from specifically applies to "MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE", not reception of OTA transmissions:

The rules and regulations set forth in this part provide for the certification of cable television systems and for their operation in conformity with standards for carriage of television broadcast signals, program exclusivity, cablecasting, access channels, and related matters. The rules and regulations in this part also describe broadcast carriage requirements for cable operators and satellite carriers.

And the paragraphs immediately after your quote go on to describe the exceptions to it.

[OcalaGator]

It seems to me that this is basically the worst of all worlds. Call me a cynic but I don't believe this will ever work; A3SA will continue to string everyone along, pile on more onerous and impossible to meet demands until the towel is thrown in.

Go back in this thread and look at some of the posts that have links you can go to and support Lon Seidman's petition to the FCC (https://lon.tv/atsc3petition). Go out and add a comment by going to 'https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express' and file a comment. Just fill in the 'Proceeding(s):' box with 16-142, then the rest of the boxes with your information. If you're not sure what to put in the comments box, you can go out and look at some of the other comments people have submitted by going to 'https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings', enter '16-142' in the 'Proceeding(s) box, press the 'Tab' key, then press the 'Enter' key. Basically letting the FCC know why allowing the broadcasters to control our 'free & public' airwaves through the use of encrypted signals is bad for consumers.

After you do that, send an email to your Congressional Representatives letting them know what the broadcasters are trying to do to prevent Americans from watching the free, over-the-air local TV broadcasts in the way we are able to do today.

I've done all of that. I just don't expect it to actually amount to anything.

[mbirk1951]

I wish SiliconDust could build an Android player module that could be DRM certified by A3SA to provide the secure path from tuner to HDMI output. It would only be the player and all the controls to the player would be handled by an Android app which would not be required to be certified by A3SA. So most of the user interface would be handled by this separate app and would be easy to update as needed, because no A3SA certification needed. Then if SD enabled third parties to use this player tuner/DVR, they could easily incorporate this into their applications. Everyone would need to purchase a SD subscription to use their player/tuner/recorder. Maybe this is not feasible but I don't see any third parties going through the A3SA certification process and SD application updates will be slowed because of A3SA recertifications.