The beginning of this video gets very technical. Please, don’t skip this whole video as parts 2 and 3 are less technical, and contain really important information. If you are interested in the technical details, but are having a hard time understanding it, please rewatch the technical sections of the video. Or, ask questions in the comment section. I would love to respond to any questions, and others who understand it better may chime in as well! This video was the culmination of over a month of research, script writing, and planning. As a college student who works other jobs, a major project like this can take up a lot of time. If you like this video, please share it with as many people as you can, to help my channel out with the RUclips algorithm! Also, if you’d like to support me as an independent creator, consider joining my Patreon or RUclips membership. There’s also a buy me a coffee link in the description and channel bio. Thanks for everyone who supports my channel!
Your video is well researched, and even the technical details are clearly summarized, but the reference to Realtek may mislead. The finished product either infringes or it doesn't, depending on whether the patent claims describe it. That's regardless of whether a Realtek chip or some other is used, unless Realtek or one of its competitors were to absorb the $6.75 license fee and pass its license on with its chip. Only LG has been sued, so far, but I believe C.D. patent infringement was written into the ATSC3 Standard itself, except for a QPSK option. QPSK, however, provides about a third of the typical payload and requires 10 dB greater C/N. I wish there were some lesser, non-infringing compromise outside of the standard that would interoperate with Standard-compliant sets, but I doubt that such exists. Thanks for your video.
IMO, the first parts of the video are not hard to follow. They are very well written and important. I'll gladly pay full price for a huge monitor and use a tuner I can toss later if needed as the first fights subside. Legally, DRM on FOTA is unacceptable in the US, BTW. Hands off my free airwaves.
@@AdrianBoykobecause public airwaves should not be encrypted! We should not have to connect to the internet in order to decrypt a signal. That puts the public at risk during emergency situations where the internet may be down.
I have no sympathy for ATSC-3. It includes DRM and encryption making a nonsense of "the public's airwaves". The idea that a TV maker can make their profit by inflicting ads on the viewer is a bad thing. ATSC-1 works just fine. The practical effect of a switch to ATSC-3 will be: 1) People will have to buy a new converter box that costs $100s of dollars rather than the $30 for an ATSC-1 box. 2) With the new box some channels still won't come in because the box lacks the keys for that one. 3) The DVR feature of the ATSC-1 box is waaaaaay better than what you can do with the ATSC-3 box. 4) The broadcasters are free to change the key they use so your box quits working
When IBM acquired the company I was working for they required us to sign agreements to the effect that anything we did anywhere while employed by them would become their intellectual property.
Its over for ATSC 3.0. It just can't compete with fast channels. Its going to go down just like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD debacle. DRM is destroying ATSC 3.0! When you leave a new broadcast standard up to corporate America - this what you get. Why buy a ATSC 3.0 tuner like I did with GTMedia's HDTV Mate and I can't watch the channels that I want due to DRM? You are not getting what you paid for. A ripoff. It would be interesting to note how many ATSC 3.0 tuners boxes were returned due to DRM? If a ATSC 3.0 tuner is not made by a major TV manufactor (who had years of designing and manufacturing tuners) its most likely crap IMHO. My old ATSC 1.0 USB tuner is made by LG.
New to antenna TV 2024. As far as I understand, the DRM keys require internet to transmit. If this can't work and distribute the keys without paying for Internet service, there is no incentive for me to put up an antenna. Also, I will not pay $150 for a tuner. I hope the TV manufacturers stop including atsc 3.0 tuners because of this patent lawsuit. This is what they get when they don't regulate th patents The DRM issue is on the broadcasters. I hope the whole thing blows up to teach them a lesson. We don't need TVs. We need monitors and a cheaper set top box. So we can upgrade boxes instead of tvs. The manufacturers should cut their costs and cut out tuners and networking. Leave that to the streaming box manufacturers.
I don't think it's in jeopardy, I think it's already dead. Being crippled with DRM is already a non-starter for consumers, but there's barely any hardware support for it (the percentage of TVs out there with ATSC 3.0 tuners is probably in the very low single digit percent). There's also barely any broadcasts with it. It's all well and good to light up an entire Television Market Area on a map because there's ATSC 3.0 there, but that just means that at least one channel is broadcasting somewhere in that market. One tower does not cover the entire market, some of the markets are geographically huge, and it doesn't even mean that all channels for people within range are ATSC 3.0. And as you pointed out, there's currently zero momentum for that deployment. For that matter, there are zero ATSC 3.0 broadcasts (or plans for any broadcasts) in Canada, despite Canada and the US operating essentially a shared broadcast space. So, we have minimal hardware support, minimal broadcast support, minimal momentum, patent encumbrance with excessive licensing fees, and the situation is only getting worse over time, not better. For that matter, from the consumer perspective, ATSC 3.0's biggest advantages don't actually require ATSC 3.0. Most ATSC broadcasts are MPEG-2, and a big increase in quality and spectrum efficiency can be had by just switching to h.264... which is already part of the ATSC 1.0 spec. And adding 4K and HDR and other things to the ATSC 1.0 spec would be easy, since it's largely just a software change. As far as I can tell, literally the only relevant advantage that ATSC 3.0 has going for it is the more efficient physical layer, and broadcasters will probably sap away most of the advantages that provides by trying to cram as much as they can into the spectrum, pushing signal integrity to the limits.
It turns out that no effort really is needed to switch ATSC-1 to a better codec. A small broadcaster is already transmitting the better resolution stuff. It turns out that the TVs mostly already have the codecs because of their ability to play other media. The ATSC-1 standard doesn't forbid the better codec.
DRM as currently implemented seems extremely problematic. If I am required to have a web connection for DRM to work it functionally disenfranchises anyone who doesn't have or wants to have the internet hooked up to their tv. The licensing with manfacturers seems pretty onerous which is why LG probably dropped it. Good standard and they're screwing it up since NAB is convinced they are right and my position is an odd "one man out" minority. One of us is right so we'll see who it is.
It should be illegal to use encryption on broadcast frequencies full stop. If they want to transmit wireless encrypted data they can go compete with the cell phone companies for spectrum.
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...
In an emergency, when the Internet is down. ATSC 3.0 may not be viewable. Who the heck thought this was a good idea? The people who developed ATSC 3.0 were likely more interested in money and broadcasters then the public. And the FCC, whose been off the job for years, has not been doing a thing about it! All they've become is another taxing authority, selling off spectrum. And if you think the buyers will be paying for it, you're dense. That will come out in our bills in one way or another! Oh, the other thing I think no one is covering. DRM may be there to push antenna viewers towards the more profitable (to the broadcaster by way of rebroadcasting fees) towards a pay service. Thus ending free over the air TV. This should be the deal for them. If you turn on DRM, you can't get rebroadcasting fees. There, fixed it for you!
As far as I'm concerned- -I do not need ATSC 3.0. In the end, it;s adoption will only serve to monetize what is FREE now. So, take your patents and eat them.
DRM makes ATSC 3.0 a non-starter for consumers. And you don't need ATSC 3.0 to broadcast in 4k. It can be done with 1.0, so there is little in it for the consumer.
I am one of the 5000+ filers on the FCC docket for ATSC3.0. I live in a market (Atlanta) where 4 out of 5 ATSC3.0 broadcasters have now implemented DRM. Until DRM is removed, I won't be transitioning to ATSC3.0. My TV viewing has always revolved around either using a network tuner card (SiliconDust) or using a central Tivo unit with minis for each TV. I do not want single TV viewing with no ability to record and watch on other locations in my home. I've been using a Tivo Roamio for 8+ years and I won't replace it until it dies, and the replacement will be an ATSC1.0 unit unless there is a 4-tuner ATSC3.0 tuner that can pull in all of my local NextGen channels with no DRM and allow me to record to my server for playback on any device in my network.
Encryption needs to go. Any broadcaster who wants to encrypt needs to just broadcast over the Internet. The airwaves NEED TO BE FREE. They are PUBLIC air waves for a reason.
Excellent informative video! The rollout of ATSC 3.0 should not be jeopardized by greed. Let's move forward and get this cleared up in a timely fashion. The Friendly Candy Company needs to step in before ATSC 3.0 turns sour.
ATSC-3 is already ruined. I don't think it can be saved. The era of over the air TV is coming to an end and the spectrum will be sold off at some point.
Not necessarily. Over the air TV is more popular now than 5 years ago and more people are investing in external antennas. A lot of the sub channels that play mainly the classics or westerns are what's hugely popular. Also with inflation rising without wages keeping up more people are going to wind up not having home internet service. The powers that be don't want the masses not to have some sort of distraction .... and therefore over the air TV will likely not go away. @@kensmith5694
New issue with live PBS TV streaming over internet not OTA (over the air) TV is that PBS has locked me out because PBS says that 35 miles away is too far away to watch their PBS live stream.
Note: I currently get all 5 PBS channels OTA (over the air) from WETA Washington DC with my outdoor antenna. So even pay internet can not repair Fair Use of live TV signals issues.
ATSC3 may be "high tech" but where I am, the ATSC3 signal is flaky and glitchy, whereas ATSC1 is rock solid. This is basically the cable companies, who own way too many broadcast TV stations, taking their cable mentality to broadcast. Drown this thing before it learns to swim.
The current rollout of ATSC 3 relied on carving out bandwidth from existing markets with existing equipment. Eventually, the excess bandwidth will dry up, and the only way to roll out more ATSC 3.0 stations would be to switch from 1.0 to 3.0, and that's not going to happen until ATSC 3 tuners and TVs are cheap and affordable.
To quote Scotty, "The more they over think the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain". Basically ATSC 3.0 has few benefits to the end user, and some could argue that it would cause more harm than good vs what we have now. I say, improve/maximize 1.0, by upgrading codecs to get many of the same features as 3.0. The only downside to that is some people with older equipment would have to upgrade. Given as you stated the low cost of 1.0 tuners, that shouldn't be a major issue.
It turns out that things that can play streaming video or content from a USB stick, tend to have the better codecs already and the software in them will use it. A station in Washington state has been transmitting content that takes advantage of that for quite a while. The codec selection is a separate issue from sending the bits over the air. It works already
Basically if ATSC 3.0 fails in the US, all the Nextgen equipment purchased by consumers, both TV’s and set-top box tuners, will become very expensive ATSC 1.0 tuners, nothing more. The other problem is that TV manufacturers that do include ATSC 3.0 tuners hardly make it known to consumers, instead emphasizing the streaming capabilities of smart TV’s to push people into paying for more streaming services. You practically have to dig through a manual to double check what kind of tuner a new TV has built in. The NextGen logo might be somewhere on the packaging- maybe. Why don’t manufacturers put some effort into advertising the new standard to consumers?
As long as there is any kind of DRM on FOTA specifically in the US, I will never support it. Use DRM on private transmissions if you want but in the US, regardless of any other country's laws, FOTA belongs to the public. Go ahead and put a big ol' bug on the corner of your free transmissions to ID yourself. Leave public airwaves out of greedy corporate hands. Edit: Somewhere early in this process a goose with golden eggs was murdered. You must imagine HBO, etc. was jumping for joy when they saw they could technically DRM a TV signal. Imagine, subscribing to HBO and seeing it with an antenna! Joy! But no. Corporations responsible for TV networks got their greedy mits into the situation, etc.
non-uniform constellations ...geeky and neat .. we will be able to develop and use this technology when the patent expires in around 20 years... just look at the ubiquity of cheap (sub $1) mp3 players that exist now that mp3 is not covered by any patents.. ..oh and we can use the .gif format without worry now too!.. ....greed often prevents new technologies from becoming widely available when they are first invented....
No. ATSC 3.0 reeks any way you slice it. The best thing to happen to 3.0 is blocking watchers from viewing it. Any complicated digital code bloatware is trash. Thumbs down for forcing this garbage on us. I'm not subscribing.
Yes the DRM nonsense is the problem. If they stripped that out, the standard could be good. It is more efficient in its use of power. It is crippled only by the DRM.
Good. Putting DRM on OTA broadcasts should be a crime. I hope all the people who invested in DRM for ATSC 3.0 lose a lot of money. I will never use it and I routinely recommend other people avoid it.
You can never really exceed the Shannon limit. When people work out the limit for the method they are using it is always slower than Shannon. They sometimes call that slower thing the Shannon limit hence the error.
I can see certain channels having DRM if they are subscription. By the same token,these channels need to have unscrambled content to fulfill their duty to the public.If you broadcast a movie channel with DRM,you need to provide news or sports or older content on a subchannel.The public has a right to information over public airwaves.
Thanks for the video. I apricate the compare and contrast to the other markets around the world. So many videos I see on 3.0 act like it a problem that has been solved years ago.
Encryption on broadcast frequencies should be illegal and technologies should be open and free to use. period. This garbage has ruined digital broadcast radio and TV in the US.
Some people only have cellphone plans for internet service. Hughes net or other similar companies are my choices for internet, Verizon home internet isn't available in my area, so 3.0 is not going to work for rual Americans that are in my situation. Ahh yeah dial up internet because we still have the old phone lines from the 70-80's no fiber optics, no DSL, the cable company wanted $5k to run a line to my house and that was 15 years ago, so no telling how much they would want today.
Question: Since news, breaking news and energy program interruptions are required for everyone to pickup,. Could the FAA since they have control of what is broadcast through the air? If you look up energy broadcast information, it should be in there that information can not be encrypted. We need to get the FCC and FAA on this subject. If they find out stations are keeping these type of broadcast encrypted, could the station be fined? Stations may not be encrypted if they are forced to not have these types of broadcasts encrypted.
The beginning of this video gets very technical. Please, don’t skip this whole video as parts 2 and 3 are less technical, and contain really important information. If you are interested in the technical details, but are having a hard time understanding it, please rewatch the technical sections of the video. Or, ask questions in the comment section. I would love to respond to any questions, and others who understand it better may chime in as well! This video was the culmination of over a month of research, script writing, and planning. As a college student who works other jobs, a major project like this can take up a lot of time. If you like this video, please share it with as many people as you can, to help my channel out with the RUclips algorithm! Also, if you’d like to support me as an independent creator, consider joining my Patreon or RUclips membership. There’s also a buy me a coffee link in the description and channel bio. Thanks for everyone who supports my channel!
Thank you for your very helpful information on OTA DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV issues and how ATSC 1.0 could be improved.
Your video is well researched, and even the technical details are clearly summarized, but the reference to Realtek may mislead. The finished product either infringes or it doesn't, depending on whether the patent claims describe it. That's regardless of whether a Realtek chip or some other is used, unless Realtek or one of its competitors were to absorb the $6.75 license fee and pass its license on with its chip.
Only LG has been sued, so far, but I believe C.D. patent infringement was written into the ATSC3 Standard itself, except for a QPSK option. QPSK, however, provides about a third of the typical payload and requires 10 dB greater C/N. I wish there were some lesser, non-infringing compromise outside of the standard that would interoperate with Standard-compliant sets, but I doubt that such exists.
Thanks for your video.
IMO, the first parts of the video are not hard to follow. They are very well written and important. I'll gladly pay full price for a huge monitor and use a tuner I can toss later if needed as the first fights subside. Legally, DRM on FOTA is unacceptable in the US, BTW. Hands off my free airwaves.
Will never watch ATSC3 unless they get rid of the DRM 100%.
Why 100%
@@AdrianBoyko Because I don't like DRM
@@estusflask982 So you won’t even watch non-DRM?
@@AdrianBoyko No
@@AdrianBoykobecause public airwaves should not be encrypted! We should not have to connect to the internet in order to decrypt a signal. That puts the public at risk during emergency situations where the internet may be down.
I have no sympathy for ATSC-3. It includes DRM and encryption making a nonsense of "the public's airwaves". The idea that a TV maker can make their profit by inflicting ads on the viewer is a bad thing.
ATSC-1 works just fine. The practical effect of a switch to ATSC-3 will be:
1) People will have to buy a new converter box that costs $100s of dollars rather than the $30 for an ATSC-1 box.
2) With the new box some channels still won't come in because the box lacks the keys for that one.
3) The DVR feature of the ATSC-1 box is waaaaaay better than what you can do with the ATSC-3 box.
4) The broadcasters are free to change the key they use so your box quits working
airwaves used to be licensed, now they are bought, so I guess they dont belong to us anymore?
Your video is right on the money. Thanks.
Wait a minute. They developed it while at NASA? On our dime? We should sue them!
😂
When IBM acquired the company I was working for they required us to sign agreements to the effect that anything we did anywhere while employed by them would become their intellectual property.
@@AdrianBoyko Even if it was on your own time at home?
@@Ron2600_ Yep. One of my coworkers tried to get an exemption for the website he was developing for his church at no cost but IBM said no.
RAND being voluntary was THE flawed premise, leading to this current status.
Its over for ATSC 3.0. It just can't compete with fast channels. Its going to go down just like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD debacle. DRM is destroying ATSC 3.0! When you leave a new broadcast standard up to corporate America - this what you get. Why buy a ATSC 3.0 tuner like I did with GTMedia's HDTV Mate and I can't watch the channels that I want due to DRM? You are not getting what you paid for. A ripoff. It would be interesting to note how many ATSC 3.0 tuners boxes were returned due to DRM? If a ATSC 3.0 tuner is not made by a major TV manufactor (who had years of designing and manufacturing tuners) its most likely crap IMHO. My old ATSC 1.0 USB tuner is made by LG.
For the record, the ATSC 1.0 tuner in my Samsung TV is absolute crap and the TV will frequently CRASH on weak signals.
New to antenna TV 2024. As far as I understand, the DRM keys require internet to transmit. If this can't work and distribute the keys without paying for Internet service, there is no incentive for me to put up an antenna. Also, I will not pay $150 for a tuner. I hope the TV manufacturers stop including atsc 3.0 tuners because of this patent lawsuit. This is what they get when they don't regulate th patents The DRM issue is on the broadcasters. I hope the whole thing blows up to teach them a lesson. We don't need TVs. We need monitors and a cheaper set top box. So we can upgrade boxes instead of tvs. The manufacturers should cut their costs and cut out tuners and networking. Leave that to the streaming box manufacturers.
I don't think it's in jeopardy, I think it's already dead. Being crippled with DRM is already a non-starter for consumers, but there's barely any hardware support for it (the percentage of TVs out there with ATSC 3.0 tuners is probably in the very low single digit percent). There's also barely any broadcasts with it. It's all well and good to light up an entire Television Market Area on a map because there's ATSC 3.0 there, but that just means that at least one channel is broadcasting somewhere in that market. One tower does not cover the entire market, some of the markets are geographically huge, and it doesn't even mean that all channels for people within range are ATSC 3.0. And as you pointed out, there's currently zero momentum for that deployment. For that matter, there are zero ATSC 3.0 broadcasts (or plans for any broadcasts) in Canada, despite Canada and the US operating essentially a shared broadcast space.
So, we have minimal hardware support, minimal broadcast support, minimal momentum, patent encumbrance with excessive licensing fees, and the situation is only getting worse over time, not better.
For that matter, from the consumer perspective, ATSC 3.0's biggest advantages don't actually require ATSC 3.0. Most ATSC broadcasts are MPEG-2, and a big increase in quality and spectrum efficiency can be had by just switching to h.264... which is already part of the ATSC 1.0 spec. And adding 4K and HDR and other things to the ATSC 1.0 spec would be easy, since it's largely just a software change. As far as I can tell, literally the only relevant advantage that ATSC 3.0 has going for it is the more efficient physical layer, and broadcasters will probably sap away most of the advantages that provides by trying to cram as much as they can into the spectrum, pushing signal integrity to the limits.
It turns out that no effort really is needed to switch ATSC-1 to a better codec. A small broadcaster is already transmitting the better resolution stuff. It turns out that the TVs mostly already have the codecs because of their ability to play other media. The ATSC-1 standard doesn't forbid the better codec.
DRM as currently implemented seems extremely problematic. If I am required to have a web connection for DRM to work it functionally disenfranchises anyone who doesn't have or wants to have the internet hooked up to their tv. The licensing with manfacturers seems pretty onerous which is why LG probably dropped it.
Good standard and they're screwing it up since NAB is convinced they are right and my position is an odd "one man out" minority. One of us is right so we'll see who it is.
Even if you have an internet connection, the broadcasters can still deny you and in fact do. They want to turn OTA into the new cable subscription.
It should be illegal to use encryption on broadcast frequencies full stop. If they want to transmit wireless encrypted data they can go compete with the cell phone companies for spectrum.
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...
Whew, it would be easier to more fully exploit what ATSC 1.0 is capable of doing, including making 4k broadcasts.
In an emergency, when the Internet is down. ATSC 3.0 may not be viewable. Who the heck thought this was a good idea? The people who developed ATSC 3.0 were likely more interested in money and broadcasters then the public. And the FCC, whose been off the job for years, has not been doing a thing about it! All they've become is another taxing authority, selling off spectrum. And if you think the buyers will be paying for it, you're dense. That will come out in our bills in one way or another!
Oh, the other thing I think no one is covering. DRM may be there to push antenna viewers towards the more profitable (to the broadcaster by way of rebroadcasting fees) towards a pay service. Thus ending free over the air TV. This should be the deal for them. If you turn on DRM, you can't get rebroadcasting fees. There, fixed it for you!
Thanks for the thorough analysis, and thanks for your use of white space to make it readable.
I want TV manufacturers to design ATSC 4.0 so they can’t get sued.. and tell the NextGen TV people to go take a long walk off a short pier.
I want TV manufacturers to design ATSC 4.0 so they can’t get sued.. and tell the NextGen TV people to go take a long walk off a short pier.
ATS 3.0 should be allowed to fail unless DRM is strictly prohibited. These are public airwaves, not broadcaster and big business airwaves!
As far as I'm concerned- -I do not need ATSC 3.0. In the end, it;s adoption will only serve to monetize what is FREE now. So, take your patents and eat them.
DRM makes ATSC 3.0 a non-starter for consumers.
And you don't need ATSC 3.0 to broadcast in 4k. It can be done with 1.0, so there is little in it for the consumer.
I am one of the 5000+ filers on the FCC docket for ATSC3.0. I live in a market (Atlanta) where 4 out of 5 ATSC3.0 broadcasters have now implemented DRM. Until DRM is removed, I won't be transitioning to ATSC3.0. My TV viewing has always revolved around either using a network tuner card (SiliconDust) or using a central Tivo unit with minis for each TV. I do not want single TV viewing with no ability to record and watch on other locations in my home. I've been using a Tivo Roamio for 8+ years and I won't replace it until it dies, and the replacement will be an ATSC1.0 unit unless there is a 4-tuner ATSC3.0 tuner that can pull in all of my local NextGen channels with no DRM and allow me to record to my server for playback on any device in my network.
Yup. My neighbor may have to help me lug my TV out to the curb when the time comes. There isn't going to be an ATSC-3 converter box
Encryption needs to go. Any broadcaster who wants to encrypt needs to just broadcast over the Internet. The airwaves NEED TO BE FREE. They are PUBLIC air waves for a reason.
Encryption needs to be permanently banned if the implementation of atsc 3.0 is gonna work.
Antenna man and Lon TV also has great coverage of this
When I heard there was DRM... I am out.
Excellent informative video! The rollout of ATSC 3.0 should not be jeopardized by greed. Let's move forward and get this cleared up in a timely fashion. The Friendly Candy Company needs to step in before ATSC 3.0 turns sour.
ATSC-3 is already ruined. I don't think it can be saved. The era of over the air TV is coming to an end and the spectrum will be sold off at some point.
Not necessarily. Over the air TV is more popular now than 5 years ago and more people are investing in external antennas. A lot of the sub channels that play mainly the classics or westerns are what's hugely popular. Also with inflation rising without wages keeping up more people are going to wind up not having home internet service. The powers that be don't want the masses not to have some sort of distraction .... and therefore over the air TV will likely not go away. @@kensmith5694
Just because something is advanced doesn't mean it is good in practice.
New issue with live PBS TV streaming over internet not OTA (over the air) TV is that PBS has locked me out because PBS says that 35 miles away is too far away to watch their PBS live stream.
That doesn't make any sense whether OTA or streaming.
Note: I currently get all 5 PBS channels OTA (over the air) from WETA Washington DC with my outdoor antenna. So even pay internet can not repair Fair Use of live TV signals issues.
ATSC3 may be "high tech" but where I am, the ATSC3 signal is flaky and glitchy, whereas ATSC1 is rock solid. This is basically the cable companies, who own way too many broadcast TV stations, taking their cable mentality to broadcast. Drown this thing before it learns to swim.
The current rollout of ATSC 3 relied on carving out bandwidth from existing markets with existing equipment. Eventually, the excess bandwidth will dry up, and the only way to roll out more ATSC 3.0 stations would be to switch from 1.0 to 3.0, and that's not going to happen until ATSC 3 tuners and TVs are cheap and affordable.
(expressed in jest) ATSC 3.0 in Jeopardy, what aspect would it be in with that TV game show? Category; contestant; or host?
To quote Scotty, "The more they over think the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain". Basically ATSC 3.0 has few benefits to the end user, and some could argue that it would cause more harm than good vs what we have now. I say, improve/maximize 1.0, by upgrading codecs to get many of the same features as 3.0. The only downside to that is some people with older equipment would have to upgrade. Given as you stated the low cost of 1.0 tuners, that shouldn't be a major issue.
It turns out that things that can play streaming video or content from a USB stick, tend to have the better codecs already and the software in them will use it. A station in Washington state has been transmitting content that takes advantage of that for quite a while. The codec selection is a separate issue from sending the bits over the air. It works already
Crazy,... wbtw is one of my locals and the stations say nothing about 3.0 progressive of growth.
It would be interesting to see if the ATSC 3.0 working group got any 'grease' while picking patents to use. Just sayin'.
Basically if ATSC 3.0 fails in the US, all the Nextgen equipment purchased by consumers, both TV’s and set-top box tuners, will become very expensive ATSC 1.0 tuners, nothing more.
The other problem is that TV manufacturers that do include ATSC 3.0 tuners hardly make it known to consumers, instead emphasizing the streaming capabilities of smart TV’s to push people into paying for more streaming services.
You practically have to dig through a manual to double check what kind of tuner a new TV has built in. The NextGen logo might be somewhere on the packaging- maybe.
Why don’t manufacturers put some effort into advertising the new standard to consumers?
As long as there is any kind of DRM on FOTA specifically in the US, I will never support it. Use DRM on private transmissions if you want but in the US, regardless of any other country's laws, FOTA belongs to the public. Go ahead and put a big ol' bug on the corner of your free transmissions to ID yourself. Leave public airwaves out of greedy corporate hands.
Edit: Somewhere early in this process a goose with golden eggs was murdered. You must imagine HBO, etc. was jumping for joy when they saw they could technically DRM a TV signal. Imagine, subscribing to HBO and seeing it with an antenna! Joy! But no. Corporations responsible for TV networks got their greedy mits into the situation, etc.
non-uniform constellations ...geeky and neat .. we will be able to develop and use this technology when the patent expires in around 20 years... just look at the ubiquity of cheap (sub $1) mp3 players that exist now that mp3 is not covered by any patents.. ..oh and we can use the .gif format without worry now too!.. ....greed often prevents new technologies from becoming widely available when they are first invented....
That's probably why atsc 3.0 rollout is slow.
I trolled their youtube accounts when the lawsuit first came out. They have since deleted all their videos. Lol
Until 3.0 gets rid of DRM, I hope it fails drastically!
No. ATSC 3.0 reeks any way you slice it. The best thing to happen to 3.0 is blocking watchers from viewing it. Any complicated digital code bloatware is trash. Thumbs down for forcing this garbage on us. I'm not subscribing.
the only thing i dissagree with is that DRM you need the web to watch atc 3 suppose people cant afford web then no tv simple.
Yes the DRM nonsense is the problem. If they stripped that out, the standard could be good. It is more efficient in its use of power. It is crippled only by the DRM.
Why is ATSC 3.0 about 10 seconds slower than regular OTA Brodcast?
Good. Putting DRM on OTA broadcasts should be a crime. I hope all the people who invested in DRM for ATSC 3.0 lose a lot of money. I will never use it and I routinely recommend other people avoid it.
Recall the development a few years back where multipath wireless reception could be utilized to exceed Shannon data carrying capacity of a channel.
You can never really exceed the Shannon limit. When people work out the limit for the method they are using it is always slower than Shannon. They sometimes call that slower thing the Shannon limit hence the error.
Yoidesu has a new atsc 30 runner can you test it for us.
I'm in a market that was taken off the list: Columbia, SC.
That sucks!
I can see certain channels having DRM if they are subscription. By the same token,these channels need to have unscrambled content to fulfill their duty to the public.If you broadcast a movie channel with DRM,you need to provide news or sports or older content on a subchannel.The public has a right to information over public airwaves.
Sports and old sitcoms aren’t exactly a public service, as defined by the FCC
How much of LG's ATSC technology and talent comes from the former Zenith?
Thanks for the video. I apricate the compare and contrast to the other markets around the world. So many videos I see on 3.0 act like it a problem that has been solved years ago.
Jacksonville, FL / Savannah, GA / Augusta, GA / Macon, GA & Columbia, SC markets will not get 3.0 now & been canceled!
i honestly want to see atsc 3.0 be a huge flop as i wouldnt need to replace the tv tuner card in my server and my mom wouldnt need to replace her tv
FCC needs to take a stance and say ASA3 is illegal.
ATSC 3.0 is a locked down crapware
This is not good for ATSC 3.0
Encryption on broadcast frequencies should be illegal and technologies should be open and free to use. period. This garbage has ruined digital broadcast radio and TV in the US.
Some people only have cellphone plans for internet service. Hughes net or other similar companies are my choices for internet, Verizon home internet isn't available in my area, so 3.0 is not going to work for rual Americans that are in my situation. Ahh yeah dial up internet because we still have the old phone lines from the 70-80's no fiber optics, no DSL, the cable company wanted $5k to run a line to my house and that was 15 years ago, so no telling how much they would want today.
leason to learn: its not always easier to lie/cheat and apologize later.
4k would be great! With all these 4k tv's without much 4k content..sad!!!..Il guess il go to Korea
atsc 3.0 the betamax of the 21st century. doa
Question:
Since news, breaking news and energy program interruptions are required for everyone to pickup,. Could the FAA since they have control of what is broadcast through the air? If you look up energy broadcast information, it should be in there that information can not be encrypted. We need to get the FCC and FAA on this subject. If they find out stations are keeping these type of broadcast encrypted, could the station be fined? Stations may not be encrypted if they are forced to not have these types of broadcasts encrypted.
My box has no problem with DRM.