All free old OTA ATSC 1.0 TV subchannels legally gone in 2027. This FCC legal trick means no free money for New DRM 3.0 TV tuners legally needed to be paid for by the DRM 3.0 TV stations. OTA DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 TV stations plan to steal all of the (Free OTA ATSC 1.0 subchannels) in one evil move by installing only (1 permanent forever Reverse ATSC 1.0 TV lighthouse transmitter antenna) to replace all old 1.0 TV stations in an area in 2027. People still can watch the free old OTA ATSC 1.0 TV without any subchannels and without needing a new expensive DRM 3.0 TV tuner box. This FCC legal trick says only one main Free channel and no subchannels are required by FCC rules. Your free OTA (over the air) USA TV subchannels birthright gone in 2027. The extra unused OTA DRM 3.0 TV bandwidth is now legally in the DRM 3.0 TV stations ownership and not in the USA people's ownership. Boycott OTA (over the air) DRM (digital rights management) encryption ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV until DRM is removed by law in the USA. IMO.
For me, the broadcast station owners want to make it as difficult as possible for consumers to view local TV stations via ATSC 3.0 OTA and keeping said consumers from jumping ship from cable and satellite TV, where the broadcast station owners reap huge money from "must carry" fees they get from the cable and satellite companies. I bought a Sony Bravia XR TV set in 2022 and it has a ATSC 3.0 tuner. I bought the set for it's features and not for it's ATSC 3.0 tuner. I also own a ADTH ATSC 3.0/1.0 external tuning box/DVR. When I first bought the set, the ATSC 3.0 tuner was not active. Only after a few months later, there was a firmware update that "activated" the tuner. We've had ATSC 3.0 broadcasting here in the Nashville market for some time. But reception of ATSC 3.0 stations has been extremely unreliable. The biggest issue is that it can take up to 10-12 seconds for the ATSC 3.0 stations to tune, which is unacceptable. ATSC 1.0 stations tune in less that 2 seconds. Only when I have contacted one of the Nashville TV stations engineers that are broadcasting in ATSC 3.0, and inform him about the slow tuning, that he contacts the "lighthouse" station engineers to let them know there is the issue, does the ATSC 3.0 slow tuning issue go away. But that only lasts a few weeks, and the slow tuning issue rears it's ugly head again. This issue happens with either DRM or non-DRM encrypted stations. Then there is the random 5-10 second signal dropouts. I contact the same engineer about that and the "lighthouse" station engineers fix that issue, only for that issue to rear it's ugly head a few weeks later as well. The only ATSC 3.0 station that tunes quickly and the signal is steady is the T2 tennis channel, which is delivered via the internet and not directly OTA. I had high hopes for ATSC 3.0, but today, I am totally unenthused about it. It is a shame that the broadcast TV industry is ruining what could be an awesome upgrade to our outdated ATSC 1.0 standard, even with it's shortcomings, is reliable.
@@mistermac56 The local access fees are not must carry feeds, I keep hearing ppl saying that and claiming the FCC forces cable and streaming to carry local channels. Under the must carry rules, a broadcaster can ask a cable company/streamer to carry the channel and they have to carry it. However,in this scenario the broadcaster cannot charge for it. These are rebroadcast fees, have nothing to do with must carry. Cable and streamers carry local channels bc ppl want them. In that case the cable company has to pay the access fee
Agreed! Sadly, when the major networks are showing their crappy shows on local affiliates, they don’t maker enough in advertising …. Or so they say! 🙄 I have been trying to cut my cable down to the bare minimum, but they still want over $150. That’s just for local channels, 15 additional favorite channels, WiFi for streaming and no DVR. It’s all about the $$$
If you actually knew the history of telecom, you'd know the government is what allows it to actually happen. Google MA Bell Breakup and you will be quite surprised to know that no breakup really happened. A cartel runs telecom, with the full backing of the government. Quit trying to regulate things you don't even understand.
Good additional information, thanks for posting it. It doesn't seem much different than the ATSC 1.0 transition, or the Sony Betamax vs Universal court case back in the 1980s(?). I just want to be able to record a few old TV shows that now come on at 3AM to watch them at a daytime hour more appropriate to me. The broadcasters seem to be trying to plug every hole in their leaky boat to keep 100% of the pirates out and 110% of the profits in, but only end up discouraging the general public who will turn away from their offerings when they get nickel-and-dimed to death.
A lot of people are wanting to pay for online subscriptions while bypassing OTA TV entirely. I'm not surprised if OTA broadcasters are hoping ATSC 3.0 will allow them to get in on the action.
@@kensmith5694 ATSC 1.0 is not going anywhere in 2027. That deadline only applies to one or two TV stations in a market hosting the ATSC 3.0. Even then it's very unlikely they will shut down their ATSC 1.0 simulcast and lose 20% of their viewers/ad revenue. See video below: ruclips.net/video/8Kjj5xVZ5nY/видео.html
Trees in my back yard will block an encrypted signal just as well as an unencrypted signal. They just want to sell encryption / decoding chips. A solution in need of a problem. Do they really think I'm going to illegally re-broadcast "The Nanny" or "ALF" or "Maude"? Why do I need an internet connection so my Zapper Box can tattle on me about my viewing habits? Why do they want to lock down my "oldies" programs that came out on DVD years ago? How can they monetize "The Andy Griffith Show" or "I Dream of Jeanie" after all these years?
@@ryanyoder7573 True, and I've got enough DVD's and avenues of self entertainment that I'd rather just not participate in their scam. Everyone needs to boycott these greedy companies and impose a correction in their thinking. Until that happens, people will continue to be the product.
I live near the Philly market, and ATSC 3 has been rendered worthless due to channel encryption. CBS and NBC are encrypted, which just leaves ABC and Fox. No point in paying more for "better" when you get less. The market killed itself.
Similar story for me in the Philadelphia market. I'm usually all for paying up for the latest tech in order to future proof it and save money, but after my old TV broke I bought myself an ATSC 1.0 TV tuner that could plug into my desktop. I've been so satisfied with it that I see no reason to even have an ATSC 3.0 TV tuner.
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...
I would be fine if ATSC 3 failed completely and stations just introduced new codecs similar to what the guy did with his station that Antenna Man interviewed. 90% of ATSC 3 benefits could be achieved on ATSC 1 with a few tweaks. EDIT: "Antenna Man TV station launches multiple 4k"
They won't do that because poor people. You literally cannot do anything in this country without addressing the poor people. Poor people may own a TV that cannot decode the newer codecs thus it's a non starter. Not to be mean, but the "what about poor people" mentality holds us all back.
For many they would be lucky to get any OTA 1.0 signal. Then, instead of working to improve reception with 3.0 they are all working to make it harder with patents and encryption..one can see no effort is going into increasing reception and getting the signal to more people.
Speaking of the FCC, I heard there is an proposal from NextSat to use the 902-928 MHz band for their backup GPS which happens to be the unlicensed ISM band that Meshtastic uses for communication and needless to say it'll likely cause interference. Not asking for a separate video on this matter, just thought I should mention it.
I'm voting with my viewing. Haven't watched network tv in 15 years. Don't intend to start doing so any time in the future either. But I submitted a comment for ya anyway.
What is up with every company encrypting things? I don't want my pictures on my phone encrypted! I want to be able to pull my SD card and read it from my computer.
On an unrelated note, I believe I see some old school storage media in the background, specifically a box of 1.2 MB 5.25" floppy disks? There was a period in the 1990s and early 2000s when I used those at work... 🙂
If you look at the state of Antenna DTV in Europe using DVB tech vs what we get over here even now, that's all you need to know about the future of ATSC 3.
I cut the cord about 10 years ago, and watched OTA frequently. But if I think about it, I have not watched OTA consistently in a few years. My TiVo and tv are sitting unused. I tried to watch the recent Olympics but was disappointed with the coverage and push to an app for more events. No way I’m buying an ATSC 3.0 tv let alone paying more for one or to use the channels. The industry is committing suicide.
I can’t believe over the air is being drm i live in Florida we rely on over the air when we lose Internet and cable do to hurricane. In an emergency we would be clueless.
I am going to pause the video for a moment to say that I fully expect to carry my TV out to the curb in 2027. An ATSC-3 converter costs over $100, they lack some of the features of the one I have, the DRM encryption junk is a non-starter with me. I am not going to connect my TV to the internet. From a practical effect point of view the switch over ends OTA TV for me.
First of all ATSC 1.0 won't shutdown in 2027, it will be operational for quite a while. Apart from that, if you do decide to stop watching OTA TV once it happens you can still use your TV to watch streaming services or even just as a big screen for PC, laptop, game consuls, streamers (for all kinds of activities) and more.
@@kensmith5694 The FCC states that that the current system will be available "until at least July 17, 2027". The "At least" means it's can be longer and past changes shows older systems are available far longer the the "at least" date. As for your TV, you don't need a smart TV to watch streaming services or stream your own content, just use a streamer. I have a good smart TV and I still use a streamer as I have the interface and limitations of smart TV's. Of course, it's your TV, you can do anything you want with it but you can use it in other ways even without OTA transmissions.
@@AL5520 When the TV no longer is used for over the air content, It no longer needs to be a TV. A computer can do what I might want in that place. I don't stream.
@@kensmith5694 A TV is a screen, usually bigger than monitors used for computers. With a tuner it can get OTA channels, but this is something you can also add to a computer so the main difference is that you watch it in order to watch something that is better to do on a bigger scree, usually in a more comfortable and relaxed position. If you don't do this you can get read of it now. From your statement it seems that you do use it now to watch all kinds of programs, as that's what you do with OTA TV. If you like doing it you'll probably find other means to continue watching such programs and if it's not important to you than, again, you don't have to wait with the change you're planning for 2027 (or later,as it won't end in 2027). In any case, If you do decide to get read of the TV it will be great if you'll donate it or at lease recycle it. www.epa.gov/recycle/electronics-donation-and-recycling
So, who should we feel bad for. The company that is holding the manufacturers for ransom? Or the broadcasters who intend to hold the consumers ransom on their own airwaves? I'm with LG. I hope they all refuse to ship atsc tuners. The consumer will not buy many separate tuners. Most people who are potential watchers will only do so if the tuner is on their new TV anyway. Broadcasters, you should have had this stuff ironed out before you switched. I hope the whole thing tanks. Remember we're letting them use our airwaves.
Didn't the Supreme Court restrict actions Gonvernment agencies can take? I wonder if it'll effect this. (The Chevron deference, yes I had to look the name up)
Sorry Lon - I was really planning to use my ZapperBox for more than experiments and testing. What a freakin' disaster this has become. The "free market" really sucks, look at Brazil and S Korea
Speaking as a consumer: 1) I will not purchase a TV or any other device with a ATSC 3.0 Tunner. 2) I will not purchase a TV or any similar device that requires an active internet connection to operate (broadband access in this area is VERY limited at best). This summer I purchased a new 48 inch OLED monitor. I paid more for plain monitor than I would have for a similar Unit with a TV tuner. I also purchased a new laser projector and a retracting home theater screen. I have not watched any OTA TV since the writers strike anyway. In my humble opinion the TV industry (manufacturers and broadcasters) are working very hard to shoot themselves in both feet
Oh there's controversy over if software patents like what you describe are even legal. The basic reason for why many argue they shouldn't be legal is software/code/etc. are really just math, which is used to tell the computer what to do. And patent law forbids patenting factual information (i.e. if you invented calculus you couldn't patent it, because it's just math which is only factual information), hence software patents shouldn't be patentable either the argument goes.
So far, i have not spent one penny on any ATSC 3.0 equipment, and I have no plans to do so. As long as ATSC 1.0 works, and it will for years to come, I'm sticking with that. And who is going to pay top dollar for the Panasonic Fire TV when the ATSC 3.0 isn't even activated, and may never be? I hope ATSC 3.0 tanks, and if it does, it will be due to their own greed.
With so many millions of people quite willing to pay for streaming services from the Internet, why be surprised broadcasters also want to turn much of OTA into pay TV as well? Sooner or later, you're going to have to pay if you want to watch a big football game in 4k and HDR on an ATSC 3.0 channel.
In my opinion, it is a glaring conflict of interest allowing cable companies to own broadcast TV stations. And it's why they're imposing their cable mentality on the (for now) free, public airwaves.
I believe that I, as a foreigner, can't send feedback to the FCC, but... how will the outcome affect customers in other parts of the world? Will the standard have compatible versions implemented outside the USA, potentially locking us into the same system, or ein this only be part of the firmware for models sold in the USA?
@@robertmason7013That is a LIE, we can have 4k right now on our current 4k atsc 1 tuner tvs if broadcasters use new encodecs that TV's can use currently!!!
I really hope not. I literally just finally hooked up some very cheap rabbit ears and am loving the HD nextgen channels I get where I live. Beats cable. I have an LG G3 so I guess I got lucky before they dropped it from their products. Still learning about all this though
This „roll out“ is such a hot mess that by the time this becomes more widely available, even more viewers will no longer watch broadcast tv. The only way this will work successfully is by stopping the DRM encryption & make tuners more available as well as make this flexible for consumers
Free to air, in my region anyway, make the channels available on the internet for free anyway.... Also, you can get anything over the internet if you really want to. The real issue is terrestrial broadcast is dead anyway. It only works for news and sport. Otherwise people prefer streaming on demand anyway. Any form of friction on atsc3 will simply kill it much faster. Realistically all this crap will go away when the owners of these parents realise this. It's greed and perceived power out of control.
If they dont increase the reception area than all this arguing is for nothing. Its like arguing over what voltage a telephone should be but not running any new telephone lines.
This is all greed, plain and simple. The broadcasters seemed to have forgotten their charter to provide to the public OTA for free. Now, they want to charge. If it were not for the rebroadcasting fees revenue they would lose, LoCast would still be on the air as their signal (and its revenue ads) would be more broadly distributed. What drives me over the edge is that I live in a condo with poor reception. The one ATSC 3.0 station comes in well except that it is bogged down with DRM channel restrictions. What worked great, of course, was LoCast. And, it fed my ChannelsDVR system. All was right with the world until the courts shut down LoCast. Now, I struggle to get local channels. I pay for Fubo but the point is, "I pay." People are going to hit a point here and just say, "Forget it." What is on locals, anyway? Access to the network, that's about it. The locals will be the ones who kill the goose that laid the gold egg and they will have only themselves to blame.
Oh no! ATSC 3.0 might fail……. Anyways… The TV manufacturers should just create ATSC 4.0.. to help prevent having to pay ANY royalties for a tuner. Propose that to FCC.. and beat these greedy companies to the punch.
yes and also: Some small TV station in Washington state has proven that you can transmit 4K video on ATSC-1. Most of the converter boxes have the needed codec and so do a lot of smart TVs. They have the codec for when they are playing stuff that didn't come over the air. It turns out that if the digital information they get over the air is for one of those other codec, the software just goes ahead and uses it.
I won't buy anything with atsc 3. Encryption? Hell no. Paying to watch for stuff I watch for free now. No. I have a question. When do they think all of this is goin to work. Version 6. Maybe 7. Hell if they change their minds the current 3.0 could just stop working. We are sorry your TV or tuner doesn't have enough memory or CPU to handle the new encryption or standard. To bad.
I believe the broadcasters are falsely putting the blame on patients when in reality it is their encryption and digital rights management killing the standard. The patient standard was just the last straw for LG after having to pay all the fees and development costs in order to make their TV complaint with A3SA standards to watch encrypted channels.
I disagree. We live in a fringe area, the technical improvements are indeed useful. However as others have posted the patent debacle and DRM are undercutting the benefits.
@@tomschmidt381 Fair enough, and I was even going to mention the reception aspect but kept it short. But as an RF engineer, that might be solved with ATSC 1.0 w/a better antenna and/or a quality low noise amp.
@@Mark-hb5zf Understand, it is hard to know how much technical info to include in a post. Just to add some more technobabble. The ability to operate remote transmitters on the same RF channel will be a boon here in terrain challenged NH especially due the the reduced number of available TV channels. But my crystal ball is not looking good for ATSC 3.0, hopefully I'm wrong.
@@buhidef My wife just wants to turn the TV on and watch it (The Bachelor) for free w/o any of the hassle. She doesn't want the entire ATSC 3.0 experience of 4K HDR, datacasting, 120Hz, etc., on a 55" TV. She's already pissed when Hulu wants her to login in again! LOL. If the ATSC 3.0 rollout was like 1.0 (with a patent pool), I'd be interested. But w/the DRM fiasco along with the lawsuit against LG, any interest has waned.
I just submitted my comments to the FCC requesting them to forbid DRM in ATSC 3.0. Thank you for all the info, my hdhomerun will stay in my shopping cart on Amazon until this gets resolved (I hope 😞)
Sadly the courts and the laws don't quite cover this. The laws were mostly written in the age of the analog TV set. The tragedy of the commons has happened in electromagnetic space. When radio was first discovered, just about anyone could transmit and a great many different people did. Today there are about 3 people that control almost all of it.
3.0 is just too complicated and expensive that the public will not embrace this faulty software. 3.0 should be without any DRM and no internet connection. It should be like 1.0, plug and play. Until they clean up 3.0, it will be dead in the water. They can mandate all they want, convert over to the flawed 3.0, people will stop watching over the air. OTA viewing had been dropping for years, but with 1.0 and sub channels, people started watching OTA again. Many of these channels were not available on satellite or cable. I read about 20% now watch OTA. If this complicated 3.0 mess is mandated in its' current form, the number of viewers will drop like flies. Today we have streaming also with lots of free services. Knock off the DRM and have a smooth transition over to Free 3.0. Then we will have something.
For a lousy $6.75 LG stops installing the tuner? These are sets selling for over $600 and in most cases well above that price point. Just tack on $7 to the price and move on.
Stop promoting ATSC 3.0. Nothing wrong with what we have. Or do you want to lose your recording and time shifting options we now have? 4k belongs on the streaming realm. Give the broadcasters more tools to disrupt the balance we now have between the broadcasting media?
I like how i negatively commented on every constellation design youtube video and on the CEOs accounts so much that constellation design deleted all their content on youtube.
Why the heck are people still watching on over-the-air TV? Networks have switched most of the content over to streaming... At least what I watch them. I've mostly lost interest in this. I use a PC based recording system which is going to get broken by DRM. If we disallow DRM then networks aren't going to provide any content. This is bad for people that don't have high speed internet... That is a problem we need to fix.
Great video as always! Looking forward to continue working with you to push back against DRM on our public airwaves.
Thank you!
Greed, absolutely no encryption on the public airwaves.
All free old OTA ATSC 1.0 TV subchannels legally gone in 2027.
This FCC legal trick means no free money for New DRM 3.0 TV tuners legally needed to be paid for by the DRM 3.0 TV stations.
OTA DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 TV stations plan to steal all of the (Free OTA ATSC 1.0 subchannels) in one evil move by installing only (1 permanent forever Reverse ATSC 1.0 TV lighthouse transmitter antenna) to replace all old 1.0 TV stations in an area in 2027.
People still can watch the free old OTA ATSC 1.0 TV without any subchannels and without needing a new expensive DRM 3.0 TV tuner box.
This FCC legal trick says only one main Free channel and no subchannels are required by FCC rules.
Your free OTA (over the air) USA TV subchannels birthright gone in 2027.
The extra unused OTA DRM 3.0 TV bandwidth is now legally in the DRM 3.0 TV stations ownership and not in the USA people's ownership.
Boycott OTA (over the air) DRM (digital rights management) encryption ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV until DRM is removed by law in the USA.
IMO.
🤣😂
It would be like them encrypting AM FM radio. A big mistake for the broadcasters to do this
For me, the broadcast station owners want to make it as difficult as possible for consumers to view local TV stations via ATSC 3.0 OTA and keeping said consumers from jumping ship from cable and satellite TV, where the broadcast station owners reap huge money from "must carry" fees they get from the cable and satellite companies.
I bought a Sony Bravia XR TV set in 2022 and it has a ATSC 3.0 tuner. I bought the set for it's features and not for it's ATSC 3.0 tuner. I also own a ADTH ATSC 3.0/1.0 external tuning box/DVR. When I first bought the set, the ATSC 3.0 tuner was not active. Only after a few months later, there was a firmware update that "activated" the tuner. We've had ATSC 3.0 broadcasting here in the Nashville market for some time. But reception of ATSC 3.0 stations has been extremely unreliable. The biggest issue is that it can take up to 10-12 seconds for the ATSC 3.0 stations to tune, which is unacceptable. ATSC 1.0 stations tune in less that 2 seconds. Only when I have contacted one of the Nashville TV stations engineers that are broadcasting in ATSC 3.0, and inform him about the slow tuning, that he contacts the "lighthouse" station engineers to let them know there is the issue, does the ATSC 3.0 slow tuning issue go away. But that only lasts a few weeks, and the slow tuning issue rears it's ugly head again. This issue happens with either DRM or non-DRM encrypted stations. Then there is the random 5-10 second signal dropouts. I contact the same engineer about that and the "lighthouse" station engineers fix that issue, only for that issue to rear it's ugly head a few weeks later as well. The only ATSC 3.0 station that tunes quickly and the signal is steady is the T2 tennis channel, which is delivered via the internet and not directly OTA.
I had high hopes for ATSC 3.0, but today, I am totally unenthused about it. It is a shame that the broadcast TV industry is ruining what could be an awesome upgrade to our outdated ATSC 1.0 standard, even with it's shortcomings, is reliable.
@@mistermac56
The local access fees are not must carry feeds, I keep hearing ppl saying that and claiming the FCC forces cable and streaming to carry local channels.
Under the must carry rules, a broadcaster can ask a cable company/streamer to carry the channel and they have to carry it. However,in this scenario the broadcaster cannot charge for it.
These are rebroadcast fees, have nothing to do with must carry. Cable and streamers carry local channels bc ppl want them. In that case the cable company has to pay the access fee
I've said it before. This is what happens when you let private industry run the show without proper regulatory oversight and guardrails.
Agreed! Sadly, when the major networks are showing their crappy shows on local affiliates, they don’t maker enough in advertising …. Or so they say! 🙄
I have been trying to cut my cable down to the bare minimum, but they still want over $150. That’s just for local channels, 15 additional favorite channels, WiFi for streaming and no DVR.
It’s all about the $$$
If you actually knew the history of telecom, you'd know the government is what allows it to actually happen. Google MA Bell Breakup and you will be quite surprised to know that no breakup really happened. A cartel runs telecom, with the full backing of the government. Quit trying to regulate things you don't even understand.
Lon, thanks again for being a great advocate for the public!!
Good additional information, thanks for posting it. It doesn't seem much different than the ATSC 1.0 transition, or the Sony Betamax vs Universal court case back in the 1980s(?). I just want to be able to record a few old TV shows that now come on at 3AM to watch them at a daytime hour more appropriate to me. The broadcasters seem to be trying to plug every hole in their leaky boat to keep 100% of the pirates out and 110% of the profits in, but only end up discouraging the general public who will turn away from their offerings when they get nickel-and-dimed to death.
eveyone wants people to pay subscriptions .. they can go to hellll.
A lot of people are wanting to pay for online subscriptions while bypassing OTA TV entirely. I'm not surprised if OTA broadcasters are hoping ATSC 3.0 will allow them to get in on the action.
Ok..they want us to subscribe/pay..but you have to be able to get the signal to begin with.
Drop the DRM and I'll buy the equipment. Otherwise the coax is now useless. Notice how HD Radio failed?
I expect it to become useless in about 2027. I am not buying a new TV or any other hardware for TV. In 2027, I expect to drag the TV to the curb.
@@kensmith5694 ATSC 1.0 is not going anywhere in 2027. That deadline only applies to one or two TV stations in a market hosting the ATSC 3.0. Even then it's very unlikely they will shut down their ATSC 1.0 simulcast and lose 20% of their viewers/ad revenue. See video below: ruclips.net/video/8Kjj5xVZ5nY/видео.html
less digital handcuffs, more Digital Radio Mondiale
@@kensmith5694 I have never owned a digital TV, and have no intention of getting one whatever the outcome turn out to be.
@@SandBoxJohn So, you still use a tube tv?
This will be another setback for the new standard.
I hope they eighty-six the encryption in an amended "ATSC 3.1" standard...
Trees in my back yard will block an encrypted signal just as well as an unencrypted signal. They just want to sell encryption / decoding chips. A solution in need of a problem. Do they really think I'm going to illegally re-broadcast "The Nanny" or "ALF" or "Maude"? Why do I need an internet connection so my Zapper Box can tattle on me about my viewing habits? Why do they want to lock down my "oldies" programs that came out on DVD years ago? How can they monetize "The Andy Griffith Show" or "I Dream of Jeanie" after all these years?
I thought the FCC was suppose to be OTA television was open to the general public. Now we have to pay to get OTA television?
The term "regulatory capture" exists for a reason. They have made a nonsense of "the public airwaves"
and they wonder why people pirate.....SMH
@@blueline308 doesn't make it right
@@ryanyoder7573 True, and I've got enough DVD's and avenues of self entertainment that I'd rather just not participate in their scam. Everyone needs to boycott these greedy companies and impose a correction in their thinking. Until that happens, people will continue to be the product.
Thanks for keeping us updated Lon
I live near the Philly market, and ATSC 3 has been rendered worthless due to channel encryption. CBS and NBC are encrypted, which just leaves ABC and Fox. No point in paying more for "better" when you get less. The market killed itself.
Similar story for me in the Philadelphia market. I'm usually all for paying up for the latest tech in order to future proof it and save money, but after my old TV broke I bought myself an ATSC 1.0 TV tuner that could plug into my desktop. I've been so satisfied with it that I see no reason to even have an ATSC 3.0 TV tuner.
ATSC 3 is dead for me now. Even though i have a HDHomerun with ATSC 3 support. They have made it worthless. ATSC 1.0 for life!!!
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...
I would be fine if ATSC 3 failed completely and stations just introduced new codecs similar to what the guy did with his station that Antenna Man interviewed. 90% of ATSC 3 benefits could be achieved on ATSC 1 with a few tweaks.
EDIT: "Antenna Man TV station launches multiple 4k"
@@jmr I do wish they get rid of 8vsb in favor of cofdm so things like the wind blowing, an airplane flying over, or mobile use doesn't kill the signal
They won't do that because poor people. You literally cannot do anything in this country without addressing the poor people. Poor people may own a TV that cannot decode the newer codecs thus it's a non starter. Not to be mean, but the "what about poor people" mentality holds us all back.
What video does that interview come from? I can't seem to find it
How does it benefit people who cannot receive ATSC 1.0 but can receive an ATSC 3.0 signal?
@@toolman1990 Some codecs deal with poor signals better by using forward error correction.
For many they would be lucky to get any OTA 1.0 signal. Then, instead of working to improve reception with 3.0 they are all working to make it harder with patents and encryption..one can see no effort is going into increasing reception and getting the signal to more people.
Speaking of the FCC, I heard there is an proposal from NextSat to use the 902-928 MHz band for their backup GPS which happens to be the unlicensed ISM band that Meshtastic uses for communication and needless to say it'll likely cause interference. Not asking for a separate video on this matter, just thought I should mention it.
The band also already being used in amateur radio, Motorola DTR radios, and utility meters for example.
I'm voting with my viewing. Haven't watched network tv in 15 years. Don't intend to start doing so any time in the future either. But I submitted a comment for ya anyway.
Once DRM entered the picture, I knew this was going the same path as AM Stereo.
What is up with every company encrypting things?
I don't want my pictures on my phone encrypted!
I want to be able to pull my SD card and read it from my computer.
It all seems like a big scam by everyone involved especially constellation designs
Form submitted. Let's hope lots of people do it.
FCC has to clean up the ATSC 3.0 fiasco. The rest of the world is using ATSC 3.0 without problems.
On an unrelated note, I believe I see some old school storage media in the background, specifically a box of 1.2 MB 5.25" floppy disks? There was a period in the 1990s and early 2000s when I used those at work... 🙂
If you look at the state of Antenna DTV in Europe using DVB tech vs what we get over here even now, that's all you need to know about the future of ATSC 3.
This is what happens when you put career MBAs in charge
No better than politicians being theatre kids.
Here's looking at you, Cortez!
Chris Kubasik is offended by this comment.
Added mine to the fillings.
I filed, against DMR, but I also stated we do not need ATSC 3 when we can have 4k picture right now with atsc 1 tuner!!!
As soon as you said this decision came out of Texas, I immediately understood that this was a patent troll case.
I cut the cord about 10 years ago, and watched OTA frequently. But if I think about it, I have not watched OTA consistently in a few years. My TiVo and tv are sitting unused. I tried to watch the recent Olympics but was disappointed with the coverage and push to an app for more events. No way I’m buying an ATSC 3.0 tv let alone paying more for one or to use the channels. The industry is committing suicide.
I can’t believe over the air is being drm i live in Florida we rely on over the air when we lose Internet and cable do to hurricane. In an emergency we would be clueless.
I am going to pause the video for a moment to say that I fully expect to carry my TV out to the curb in 2027.
An ATSC-3 converter costs over $100, they lack some of the features of the one I have, the DRM encryption junk is a non-starter with me. I am not going to connect my TV to the internet. From a practical effect point of view the switch over ends OTA TV for me.
First of all ATSC 1.0 won't shutdown in 2027, it will be operational for quite a while.
Apart from that, if you do decide to stop watching OTA TV once it happens you can still use your TV to watch streaming services or even just as a big screen for PC, laptop, game consuls, streamers (for all kinds of activities) and more.
@@AL5520 According to the FCC, ATSC-1 goes away in 2027.
No, I can't use my TV to watch streaming services. It is not a "smart TV"
@@kensmith5694 The FCC states that that the current system will be available "until at least July 17, 2027". The "At least" means it's can be longer and past changes shows older systems are available far longer the the "at least" date. As for your TV, you don't need a smart TV to watch streaming services or stream your own content, just use a streamer. I have a good smart TV and I still use a streamer as I have the interface and limitations of smart TV's.
Of course, it's your TV, you can do anything you want with it but you can use it in other ways even without OTA transmissions.
@@AL5520 When the TV no longer is used for over the air content, It no longer needs to be a TV. A computer can do what I might want in that place. I don't stream.
@@kensmith5694 A TV is a screen, usually bigger than monitors used for computers. With a tuner it can get OTA channels, but this is something you can also add to a computer so the main difference is that you watch it in order to watch something that is better to do on a bigger scree, usually in a more comfortable and relaxed position. If you don't do this you can get read of it now.
From your statement it seems that you do use it now to watch all kinds of programs, as that's what you do with OTA TV. If you like doing it you'll probably find other means to continue watching such programs and if it's not important to you than, again, you don't have to wait with the change you're planning for 2027 (or later,as it won't end in 2027).
In any case, If you do decide to get read of the TV it will be great if you'll donate it or at lease recycle it.
www.epa.gov/recycle/electronics-donation-and-recycling
The whole purpose of ota is not to have to pay.
So, who should we feel bad for. The company that is holding the manufacturers for ransom? Or the broadcasters who intend to hold the consumers ransom on their own airwaves? I'm with LG. I hope they all refuse to ship atsc tuners. The consumer will not buy many separate tuners. Most people who are potential watchers will only do so if the tuner is on their new TV anyway. Broadcasters, you should have had this stuff ironed out before you switched. I hope the whole thing tanks. Remember we're letting them use our airwaves.
Wait there is still over the air TV?
NEXTGEN TV is dead unless the FCC clears up this mess without DRM.
Didn't the Supreme Court restrict actions Gonvernment agencies can take? I wonder if it'll effect this. (The Chevron deference, yes I had to look the name up)
They said that regulatory agencies can’t rely on experts, just lawyers and lobbyists.
So should i hold off on buying that antenna you have and reviewed?,
The only winners are the lawyers.
Truer words have never been written.
Sorry Lon - I was really planning to use my ZapperBox for more than experiments and testing. What a freakin' disaster this has become. The "free market" really sucks, look at Brazil and S Korea
Speaking as a consumer:
1) I will not purchase a TV or any other device with a ATSC 3.0 Tunner.
2) I will not purchase a TV or any similar device that requires an active internet connection to operate (broadband access in this area is VERY limited at best).
This summer I purchased a new 48 inch OLED monitor. I paid more for plain monitor than I would have for a similar Unit with a TV tuner. I also purchased a new laser projector and a retracting home theater screen. I have not watched any OTA TV since the writers strike anyway. In my humble opinion the TV industry (manufacturers and broadcasters) are working very hard to shoot themselves in both feet
I think the TV 3.0 system that Brazil is using looks good.
This is why algorithms shouldn't be patentable. This is also why public airwaves shouldn't use encryption of any kind.
Oh there's controversy over if software patents like what you describe are even legal. The basic reason for why many argue they shouldn't be legal is software/code/etc. are really just math, which is used to tell the computer what to do. And patent law forbids patenting factual information (i.e. if you invented calculus you couldn't patent it, because it's just math which is only factual information), hence software patents shouldn't be patentable either the argument goes.
So far, i have not spent one penny on any ATSC 3.0 equipment, and I have no plans to do so. As long as ATSC 1.0 works, and it will for years to come, I'm sticking with that. And who is going to pay top dollar for the Panasonic Fire TV when the ATSC 3.0 isn't even activated, and may never be? I hope ATSC 3.0 tanks, and if it does, it will be due to their own greed.
With so many millions of people quite willing to pay for streaming services from the Internet, why be surprised broadcasters also want to turn much of OTA into pay TV as well? Sooner or later, you're going to have to pay if you want to watch a big football game in 4k and HDR on an ATSC 3.0 channel.
I really would rather not pirate TV , but I have had it with the Corporate Greed.
It makes pirating seem ok. BTW, what happened to ATSC 2.0 ?
By the time they finalized the standards for 2.0, it was obsolete
In my opinion, it is a glaring conflict of interest allowing cable companies to own broadcast TV stations. And it's why they're imposing their cable mentality on the (for now) free, public airwaves.
We should also work on the FTC. That level of industry collusion is somewhere near the line of appropriate and legal.
Link to fccInstructions would be better
What is going on with silicone dust and the atsc 3 i bought the flex just because it had atsc 3 any word what they are doing
Dear Sir: What is the reason you haven't posted a link from the FCC's Public Comment Secton in this video's show notes?
I believe that I, as a foreigner, can't send feedback to the FCC, but... how will the outcome affect customers in other parts of the world? Will the standard have compatible versions implemented outside the USA, potentially locking us into the same system, or ein this only be part of the firmware for models sold in the USA?
ATSC is pretty much USA and Canada specific. The rest of the world largely uses DVB based standards.
I was looking forward to an 4k picture and better recipion.
4k has proven to not look much better than 1080p on tv's unless you sit close to ur tv and/or its the size of your wall
@@Warp2090 tv stations don't currently broadcast in 4k because there is not enough bandwith. In order to do so 1.0 must be shut down.
@@robertmason7013That is a LIE, we can have 4k right now on our current 4k atsc 1 tuner tvs if broadcasters use new encodecs that TV's can use currently!!!
So If all the companies pull out of the patent pool does that mean ATSC is a dead standard? Does this affect ATSC 3.0 in Canada as well?
I changed my mind about getting a ATSC 3.0 tuner, just not worth it at this time. (The Broadcasters are behaving like children)
It's dead. People will just go to the internet. Atsc3 is dead.
I really hope not. I literally just finally hooked up some very cheap rabbit ears and am loving the HD nextgen channels I get where I live. Beats cable. I have an LG G3 so I guess I got lucky before they dropped it from their products. Still learning about all this though
Sure, why get something over the air for free when you can pay instead? (Rolls eyes)
This „roll out“ is such a hot mess that by the time this becomes more widely available, even more viewers will no longer watch broadcast tv. The only way this will work successfully is by stopping the DRM encryption & make tuners more available as well as make this flexible for consumers
Free to air, in my region anyway, make the channels available on the internet for free anyway....
Also, you can get anything over the internet if you really want to.
The real issue is terrestrial broadcast is dead anyway. It only works for news and sport. Otherwise people prefer streaming on demand anyway.
Any form of friction on atsc3 will simply kill it much faster. Realistically all this crap will go away when the owners of these parents realise this. It's greed and perceived power out of control.
If they dont increase the reception area than all this arguing is for nothing. Its like arguing over what voltage a telephone should be but not running any new telephone lines.
This is all greed, plain and simple. The broadcasters seemed to have forgotten their charter to provide to the public OTA for free. Now, they want to charge. If it were not for the rebroadcasting fees revenue they would lose, LoCast would still be on the air as their signal (and its revenue ads) would be more broadly distributed. What drives me over the edge is that I live in a condo with poor reception. The one ATSC 3.0 station comes in well except that it is bogged down with DRM channel restrictions. What worked great, of course, was LoCast. And, it fed my ChannelsDVR system. All was right with the world until the courts shut down LoCast. Now, I struggle to get local channels. I pay for Fubo but the point is, "I pay."
People are going to hit a point here and just say, "Forget it." What is on locals, anyway? Access to the network, that's about it. The locals will be the ones who kill the goose that laid the gold egg and they will have only themselves to blame.
Oh no! ATSC 3.0 might fail……. Anyways… The TV manufacturers should just create ATSC 4.0.. to help prevent having to pay ANY royalties for a tuner. Propose that to FCC.. and beat these greedy companies to the punch.
Once again the consumer is the big loser. Who watches TV nowadays anyway?
Like we needed a new version of ATSC. DRM is the reason for this change, but the content makers are starting to learn how toxic that is for customers.
No sunset date that's the biggest problem.
DONE! FCC Comment added
Don't even care about 3.0 anymore. I don't think anyone really cares to be honest.😂
Yoidesu has a new atsc TV 3.0 tunner. Can you test it for us.its for phone and computer and tv.
A single patent holder p's in the patent pool and spoils it for everyone. If everyone else does the same, they will have to close the pool.
"...the availability of (atsc 3.0) tuners is broad and deep..." What the heck were (and are) they (Pearl TV consortium) smoking?
TV was just fine when it was Analog . Now it's all messed up
These companies are starting to see how ATSC 3.0 start sinking and are now trying to right the ship.
They should just keep the 1.0 standard. Too much red tape and besides I don't need to watch my local broadcast in 4k.
yes and also:
Some small TV station in Washington state has proven that you can transmit 4K video on ATSC-1.
Most of the converter boxes have the needed codec and so do a lot of smart TVs. They have the codec for when they are playing stuff that didn't come over the air. It turns out that if the digital information they get over the air is for one of those other codec, the software just goes ahead and uses it.
What a mess.
Isn’t the main obstacle cable companies who want revenue from ATSC 3
Cable companies don’t derive revenue from ATSC 3, they get borderline extorted by broadcasters for carrying OTA content
Don't know as I refuse to ever again do business with a cable TV company.
@@Bonjour-World I’m with you bro….never more business with a cable company. They are despicable.
Proprietary technology has no place in a public broadcast standard.
I won't buy anything with atsc 3. Encryption? Hell no. Paying to watch for stuff I watch for free now. No. I have a question. When do they think all of this is goin to work. Version 6. Maybe 7. Hell if they change their minds the current 3.0 could just stop working. We are sorry your TV or tuner doesn't have enough memory or CPU to handle the new encryption or standard. To bad.
I hope so no Internet on any of my TVs. I want to be off grid including TV. 73
You like many others will be a lot better off if ATSC-3 tanks. Did you follow the link and add your voice?
I believe the broadcasters are falsely putting the blame on patients when in reality it is their encryption and digital rights management killing the standard. The patient standard was just the last straw for LG after having to pay all the fees and development costs in order to make their TV complaint with A3SA standards to watch encrypted channels.
patient like a cancer patient?
I would pay $6 to allow my HDHomerun to decrypt ATSC 3 signals.
do we really need atsc 3?
Who cares if the crap they broadcast is encrypted or not? Crap is still crap, scrambled or not.
PBS is broadcasting a mystery program I like tonight.
ATSC 3.0: An *upgrade* that no one asked for... In the end, it will just turn into a money grab from the viewers.
We did need ATSC 3.0, just not DRM nonsense!
I disagree. We live in a fringe area, the technical improvements are indeed useful. However as others have posted the patent debacle and DRM are undercutting the benefits.
@@tomschmidt381 Fair enough, and I was even going to mention the reception aspect but kept it short. But as an RF engineer, that might be solved with ATSC 1.0 w/a better antenna and/or a quality low noise amp.
@@Mark-hb5zf Understand, it is hard to know how much technical info to include in a post. Just to add some more technobabble. The ability to operate remote transmitters on the same RF channel will be a boon here in terrain challenged NH especially due the the reduced number of available TV channels. But my crystal ball is not looking good for ATSC 3.0, hopefully I'm wrong.
@@buhidef My wife just wants to turn the TV on and watch it (The Bachelor) for free w/o any of the hassle. She doesn't want the entire ATSC 3.0 experience of 4K HDR, datacasting, 120Hz, etc., on a 55" TV. She's already pissed when Hulu wants her to login in again! LOL.
If the ATSC 3.0 rollout was like 1.0 (with a patent pool), I'd be interested. But w/the DRM fiasco along with the lawsuit against LG, any interest has waned.
I just submitted my comments to the FCC requesting them to forbid DRM in ATSC 3.0.
Thank you for all the info, my hdhomerun will stay in my shopping cart on Amazon until this gets resolved (I hope 😞)
this is getting ridiculous - why is free tv no longer free\\
7:38 this is incredibly anti-competitive… and prevents innovation… wish a lawyer would step in and take these bozos to court.
Sadly the courts and the laws don't quite cover this. The laws were mostly written in the age of the analog TV set. The tragedy of the commons has happened in electromagnetic space. When radio was first discovered, just about anyone could transmit and a great many different people did. Today there are about 3 people that control almost all of it.
I have felt 3.0 is dead for a while now and won't happen. But just my opinion.
Tyler the "Antenna Man" on You Tube has a lot to say on this subject and is tracking this story..
Doesn't anyone just watch TV anymore ? Good luck with the channel 👍 . ps Google just been fined for their monopoly of the internet ?
3.0 is just too complicated and expensive that the public will not embrace this faulty software. 3.0 should be without any DRM and no internet connection. It should be like 1.0, plug and play. Until they clean up 3.0, it will be dead in the water. They can mandate all they want, convert over to the flawed 3.0, people will stop watching over the air. OTA viewing had been dropping for years, but with 1.0 and sub channels, people started watching OTA again. Many of these channels were not available on satellite or cable. I read about 20% now watch OTA. If this complicated 3.0 mess is mandated in its' current form, the number of viewers will drop like flies. Today we have streaming also with lots of free services. Knock off the DRM and have a smooth transition over to Free 3.0. Then we will have something.
Just stick a fork in ATSC 3.0 and switch all the ATSC 1.0 stations to AVC. (Only sort of joking.)
For a lousy $6.75 LG stops installing the tuner? These are sets selling for over $600 and in most cases well above that price point. Just tack on $7 to the price and move on.
this is what happens when congress doesn't know jack or they have conflict$ of interest.
"Also... as well"? Heh, oopsie.
I will use atsc 1.0 and cb radio if phone company keeps getting greedy.
Stop promoting ATSC 3.0. Nothing wrong with what we have. Or do you want to lose your recording and time shifting options we now have? 4k belongs on the streaming realm. Give the broadcasters more tools to disrupt the balance we now have between the broadcasting media?
2024 Sept OTA user Concern
when transition happens what happens to sub channels cozi tv metv metv tunes antenna tv rewind excedra...
GREED is ruining ATSC 3.0.
I like how i negatively commented on every constellation design youtube video and on the CEOs accounts so much that constellation design deleted all their content on youtube.
Pretty clear ATSC 3.0 is dead in the current form. Sad times ahead for OTA TV.
Why the heck are people still watching on over-the-air TV? Networks have switched most of the content over to streaming... At least what I watch them. I've mostly lost interest in this. I use a PC based recording system which is going to get broken by DRM. If we disallow DRM then networks aren't going to provide any content. This is bad for people that don't have high speed internet... That is a problem we need to fix.