Encryption

[nickk]

Lon Seidman and Antenna Man met with the FCC...

Lon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuZ0_jq1-A

Antenna Man:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jIyLPsVfv4

[Dxcv]

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.

While that might be best case scenario, there are still a couple of issues:

1. In the case of a natural disaster in the middle of the night, there might be a station engineer on hand to shut off the DRM. (Or even remember DRM is enabled)

2. It would not make sense for the viewers to have have the hardware to receive the ATSC 3.0 broadcast set up if all they receive normally is DRM'ed channels.

[Phoenixfury]

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.

If the broadcaster locked out a channel with DRM, it's likely the viewer will choose to not have that channel accessible in their guide. Why would they? No one's going to keep channels on their guide they aren't going to be able to view anyway. So the point of turning off DRM for an emergency is kind of pointless. The broadcasters should be more concerned that many of their viewers aren't able to watch their channels in the first place.

Let's have a show of hands here. How many of you with Flex 4K's remove DRM'd 3.0 channels from your channel guide (there for you don't even see the channel, and how many just leave them in there?

As for me, I removed them because I can't tune into them anyways.

[NatHillIV]

Lon Seidman and Antenna Man met with the FCC...

Lon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuZ0_jq1-A

Antenna Man:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jIyLPsVfv4

I personally think AntennaManPA did a much better job. Lon might have given the impression that any old TV would easily work with an ATSC 3.0 signal.
But I personally thank both of them for their tireless efforts. I hope the FCC folks actually paid some attention. Will be interesting to see how the broadcast industry responds.

[jasonl]

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.

It's not like this is theoretical. They could be doing that now during hazardous events like fires, floods, and tornadoes, and they don't.

[Cabal]

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.

It's not like this is theoretical. They could be doing that now during hazardous events like fires, floods, and tornadoes, and they don't.

Can confirm. During the recent flash floods that killed 27 children at Camp Mystic, our local NBC (KXAN) 3.0 broadcast in Austin remained encrypted.

[bandit5731]

Lon Seidman and Antenna Man met with the FCC...

Lon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuZ0_jq1-A

Antenna Man:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jIyLPsVfv4

I personally think AntennaManPA did a much better job. Lon might have given the impression that any old TV would easily work with an ATSC 3.0 signal.
But I personally thank both of them for their tireless efforts. I hope the FCC folks actually paid some attention. Will be interesting to see how the broadcast industry responds.

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

[Cabal]

they basicly can... hevc came out in April 2013.
so figure in 2015 and newer tvs can handle hevc.

That is... very generous of you, but I think unrealistic. There are still recent ATSC 1.0 TVs that can't handle AVC (H.264) OTA channels. Here's one from 2021 (manual dated 12/17/21) that a poster on another forum (can't link it here) indicated fails on anything except MPEG-2 channels: https://www.lg.com/us/support/product/l ... 15B-PU.AUS

[lonseidman]

I personally think AntennaManPA did a much better job. Lon might have given the impression that any old TV would easily work with an ATSC 3.0 signal.
But I personally thank both of them for their tireless efforts. I hope the FCC folks actually paid some attention. Will be interesting to see how the broadcast industry responds.

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 presentation. The argument I made was that DRM is the root cause of the consumer adoption problem. There is a very good chance consumers have the equipment they need today to watch ATSC 3.0 content inexpensively if only there wasn't a substantial and expensive private regulatory environment around making a DRM compatible tuning device.

Oh - and if the TV doesn't support it there's likely a cheap set top box/stick that will. All in you could have a tuner+tv stick for less than the price of the slop they are pushing onto consumers.

[NatHillIV]

I personally think AntennaManPA did a much better job. Lon might have given the impression that any old TV would easily work with an ATSC 3.0 signal.
But I personally thank both of them for their tireless efforts. I hope the FCC folks actually paid some attention. Will be interesting to see how the broadcast industry responds.

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 presentation. The argument I made was that DRM is the root cause of the consumer adoption problem. There is a very good chance consumers have the equipment they need today to watch ATSC 3.0 content inexpensively if only there wasn't a substantial and expensive private regulatory environment around making a DRM compatible tuning device.

Oh - and if the TV doesn't support it there's likely a cheap set top box/stick that will. All in you could have a tuner+tv stick for less than the price of the slop they are pushing onto consumers.

I watched your excellent presentation again. I also read the ex parte, and it was even better being read than watching the presentations.
I was overly concerned that the commissioners might think that by removing DRM any old TV could by itself handle an ATSC 3.0 signal.
THANKS TO YOU BOTH! That's my main take home message.

[howardc1243]

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 presentation. The argument I made was that DRM is the root cause of the consumer adoption problem. There is a very good chance consumers have the equipment they need today to watch ATSC 3.0 content inexpensively if only there wasn't a substantial and expensive private regulatory environment around making a DRM compatible tuning device.

Oh - and if the TV doesn't support it there's likely a cheap set top box/stick that will. All in you could have a tuner+tv stick for less than the price of the slop they are pushing onto consumers.

I watched your excellent presentation again. I also read the ex parte, and it was even better being read than watching the presentations.
I was overly concerned that the commissioners might think that by removing DRM any old TV could by itself handle an ATSC 3.0 signal.
THANKS TO YOU BOTH! That's my main take home message.

television sets prior to 2000 might not be able to handle the hevc, and so might not be able to handle the hdhomerun.

[howardc1243]

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.

It's not like this is theoretical. They could be doing that now during hazardous events like fires, floods, and tornadoes, and they don't.

Can confirm. During the recent flash floods that killed 27 children at Camp Mystic, our local NBC (KXAN) 3.0 broadcast in Austin remained encrypted.

they didn't do that during the kerrville flash flood that killed 143 people, and kerville was served by four atsc 3.0 stations of which the two news stations were encrypted.

[howardc1243]

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.

If the broadcaster locked out a channel with DRM, it's likely the viewer will choose to not have that channel accessible in their guide. Why would they? No one's going to keep channels on their guide they aren't going to be able to view anyway. So the point of turning off DRM for an emergency is kind of pointless. The broadcasters should be more concerned that many of their viewers aren't able to watch their channels in the first place.

Let's have a show of hands here. How many of you with Flex 4K's remove DRM'd 3.0 channels from your channel guide (there for you don't even see the channel, and how many just leave them in there?

As for me, I removed them because I can't tune into them anyways.

i hide them as well.

[bandit5731]

Exactly - that was the whole point of that section of my presentation. The argument I made was that DRM is the root cause of the consumer adoption problem. There is a very good chance consumers have the equipment they need today to watch ATSC 3.0 content inexpensively if only there wasn't a substantial and expensive private regulatory environment around making a DRM compatible tuning device.

Oh - and if the TV doesn't support it there's likely a cheap set top box/stick that will. All in you could have a tuner+tv stick for less than the price of the slop they are pushing onto consumers.

I watched your excellent presentation again. I also read the ex parte, and it was even better being read than watching the presentations.
I was overly concerned that the commissioners might think that by removing DRM any old TV could by itself handle an ATSC 3.0 signal.
THANKS TO YOU BOTH! That's my main take home message.

television sets prior to 2000 might not be able to handle the hevc, and so might not be able to handle the hdhomerun.

did you know that some of hdhomeruns could take mpeg2 and transcode to h264 on fly? there is nothing stopping a new tuner from changing hevc to mpeg2 if drm was gone and the market wanted sucha device. so for old tvs there are options. tuners would be 20$ if drm was gone

[howardc1243]

howardc1243 - do you mean AntennaMan rather than Lon?

you're right nickk it was antennaman - sorry.