When support for ATSC 3.0 DRM will be available?

[Jaylaw]

If all channels are encrypted why the company keeps telling the $199 device supports it (ATSC 3.0, most channels are encrypted nowadays). People buy device with the ATSC 3.0 support thinking they can watch the channels, but channels are not viewable? Seems misleading to me. Is there going to be any support on the current hardware or we have to wait and buy another device? Right now is better to buy the ATSC 1.0 version and you save $50. Unless the encryption issue is resolved with the products (the box is connected to the internet, so if that is a requirement is there)

[nickk]

We are very clear on our website and on Amazon that DRM channels are not supported.

With that said, the HDHomeRun hardware has little to do with DRM as its job is to stream the DRM encrypted video to the app.
The decryption and playback is handled by the player device with app assistance.

In our opinion A3SA is trying to make supporting DRM as difficult as possible. As A3SA rules stand today DRM cannot be supported on any Apple product (Mac, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV), cannot be supported on any Microsoft product (Windows or XBox), cannot be supported on any web based television (Samsung or LG) even if ATSC 3.0 certified, and we are pretty sure cannot be supported on Roku.

[gtb]

In our opinion A3SA is trying to make supporting DRM as difficult as possible. As A3SA rules stand today DRM cannot be supported on any Apple product (Mac, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV), cannot be supported on any Microsoft product (Windows or XBox), cannot be supported on any web based television (Samsung or LG) even if ATSC 3.0 certified, and we are pretty sure cannot be supported on Roku.

Let's, for the moment, assume A3SA continues to insist on their documented end-to-end fully protected content path (which, to this point, they seem to be choosing to do, and for which alternative vendors have chosen to accommodate; even the public documents specified a clear potential recording/playback path with an A3SA approved solution set). That is clearly in conflict with SD's current desired solution path. So, does SD plan to offer an Android solution soon (which seems to be possible), or hold off any such possible offerings until A3SA agrees to the SD requests to change their specifications? That is a critical question which would seem to be 100% under SD decision control, even if it ends up undercutting SD's desires for promoting their existing solution path. FD: I don't actually expect SD to answer the question publicly, but I would hope they are discussing it internally.

[hdhruser]

In our opinion A3SA is trying to make supporting DRM as difficult as possible. As A3SA rules stand today DRM cannot be supported on any Apple product (Mac, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV), cannot be supported on any Microsoft product (Windows or XBox), cannot be supported on any web based television (Samsung or LG) even if ATSC 3.0 certified, and we are pretty sure cannot be supported on Roku.

Let's, for the moment, assume A3SA continues to insist on their documented end-to-end fully protected content path (which, to this point, they seem to be choosing to do, and for which alternative vendors have chosen to accommodate; even the public documents specified a clear potential recording/playback path with an A3SA approved solution set). That is clearly in conflict with SD's current desired solution path. So, does SD plan to offer an Android solution soon (which seems to be possible), or hold off any such possible offerings until A3SA agrees to the SD requests to change their specifications? That is a critical question which would seem to be 100% under SD decision control, even if it ends up undercutting SD's desires for promoting their existing solution path. FD: I don't actually expect SD to answer the question publicly, but I would hope they are discussing it internally.

Some alternative vendors have attempted to accommodate but it just never seems to work well - have you not been following any of Lon.TV's videos about such devices? It's not just a matter of they just work, there are many caveats and some might be deal-breakers if you knew about them (for example, do you really want a device running very outdated and insecure software running on your local network? If you don't allow it to connect to your network it will be useless, but if you do allow it you are leaving an opening for hackers to get into your system).

I would very much prefer that SD stick to its guns. If they release a barely-working or insecure device, the A3SA (may they rot in hell) will use them as an example of available equipment. If they shut off ATSC1 and all the ATSC3 channels are DRM protected then I'll just watch YouTube and/or free streaming channels. The local broadcast channels will be useless if they stop working when there's an internet outage (as might be the case during severe weather, the one time you might really need to see a local broadcaster). But at this point I have no use for the local broadcasters anyway, they are killing their golden goose and there is a whole generation of younger people that rarely or never watch broadcast TV (one of the reasons Cable TV is quickly dying). If sports broadcasts move completely to streaming then that golden goose will be cooked. I have almost completely stopped watching new network TV shows, I have too many other things to watch or do that I find more interesting anyway, and if they really shut off ATSC1 in two or three years then I won't be missing anything. I would not blame the SD founders if they started looking for new tech fields to spend their development time on, since the A3SA and the local broadcasters are clearly suicidal and unless they change direction very quickly they will be competing for a rapidly declining pool of viewers.