Broadcasters to Encrypt ATSC 3.0 Signals - How it Impacts Free OTA TV

[primestar31]

Do you have relevant documentation to support your position?

Don't need anything beyond common sense. The providers are NOT going to regular encrypt OTA signals we've always receive, to make us PAY for them. Our receivers will automatically decrypt them.

They are encrypting because they THINK people will intercept and record them. Why they think that will stop people, is beyond me, because encryption has NEVER stopped pirates for long.

 

[harshness]

Don't need anything beyond common sense. The providers are NOT going to regular encrypt OTA signals we've always receive, to make us PAY for them.

Common sense dictates that the stations will seek to monetize their franchises to the greatest extent possible. Encryption will allow them to charge for whatever content they aren't required to offer for free as a condition of their license and franchise agreements. It is abundantly clear that conventional advertising has long been subject to a blitz from the Web (that has already decimated the print media marketplace) so it isn't reasonable to assume that the stations can reel those revenues back in in the future.

What you need to offer is references to policy as reasons, valid or otherwise, abound on both sides.

 

[Justin Hill]

If its money the stations want, they usually get it through ad revenue. Local TV stations across all 200+ media markets are a local business like anyone else. Local stations do have the protection of the FCC and the NAB. Right now, many of those local stations do get alternate forms of ad revenue from their digital subchannels as well as downloadable streaming and weather apps. I have a feeling they'll keep the free subchannels on the lower numbers (##.2-##.99) unencrypted, while higher-numbered pay subchannels (##.100-999) will be encrypted/scrambled until the user pays the TV station to subscribe to it (some pay subchannels may be commercial-free)...

 

[harshness]

If its money the stations want, they usually get it through ad revenue.

While that model sustained the TV stations through most of the 1990s, it began to break down at the end as the stations were spending millions competing with each other (The News Wars) and more for syndicated programming. With the advent of DTV, viewer's attention was being spread around with so many new choices.

DVRs and streaming services like Hulu put crushing pressure on ad revenues for the broadcast network channels. Streaming services have caused more than a few to more or less give up on live TV.

It isn't enough just to say that ads can support operations.

 

[Corrado]

Since Orby went out of business, I have not had subscription TV nor do I stream anything. When I have time to watch TV it's mostly what I receive over the air locally, mostly for convenience whether live or recorded. My satellite FTA channels and feeds closely mirror what I receive OTA at this time except for a few channels here and there.

Should the day come that the stations decide they want payment, I probably won't bother. With all the streaming services and options out there I feel that will be my solution should I pay for anything.

 

[Justin Hill]

While that model sustained the TV stations through most of the 1990s, it began to break down at the end as the stations were spending millions competing with each other (The News Wars) and more for syndicated programming. With the advent of DTV, viewer's attention was being spread around with so many new choices.

DVRs and streaming services like Hulu put crushing pressure on ad revenues for the broadcast network channels. Streaming services have caused more than a few to more or less give up on live TV.

It isn't enough just to say that ads can support operations.

I found NO PROOF to back that up: atsc 3.0 channel encryption - Google Search

 

[harshness]

I found NO PROOF to back that up: atsc 3.0 channel encryption - Google Search

You won't win any arguments with links to a Google results page. You need to provide links to specific articles that make your point.

Chances are awfully good that none of those articles suggests that the point of encryption is to keep free broadcast TV, as we know it today, free.

 

[Tower Guy]

I found NO PROOF to back that up: atsc 3.0 channel encryption - Google Search

In my opinion it’s an exaggeration just to get you to watch the YouTube video.

 

[Justin Hill]

You won't win any arguments with links to a Google results page. You need to provide links to specific articles that make your point.

Chances are awfully good that none of those articles suggests that the point of encryption is to keep free broadcast TV, as we know it today, free.

I found a blog at Solid Signal that might shed some light on the subject:

ATSC 3.0 stumbles again - The Solid Signal Blog

That's right, another bit of bad news threatens to derail the whole thing.

blog.solidsignal.com

 

[harshness]

I found a blog at Solid Signal that might shed some light on the subject:

You need to find something that actually speaks to the idea that free TV will remain free TV. Stuart's article only mentions encryption as a justification for declaring today's NextGenTV a false start. I'm not sure what he's saying is technically true but it certainly casts a dark cloud.

Based on a skimming of the ATSC A/360 documentation, NextGen TV will use CENC encryption that is already in use in web streaming so I expect it won't be impossible to adapt at some level. Whether delivered via OTA or over the Internet, the underlying protocol of ATSC 3.0 remains TCP/IP streaming.

A/360, “ATSC 3.0 Security and Service Protection” - ATSC : NextGen TV

This standard specifies the mechanisms for security and service protections in ATSC 3.0 systems. Download A/360:2022-03, “ATSC 3.0 Security and Service Protection,” approved 2 May 2022, and accompanying schema. Previous Versions There are multiple versions of this document. Please be sure to...

www.atsc.org

 

[mwdxer1]

Times change. Except, the rich get richer.

Rule is the “.1” sub channel must be free. I expect the others to slowly migrate to fee based. Yes, even today’s soap operas and reality shows. I expect .1 to become local news and weather.

OTA WILL NOT REMAIN FREE AS WE KNOW IT. These stations did not invest millions without expecting a return on their investment. That “free” stuff will not be available anywhere for free. But it’s years away.

There are folks in the industry that think we should pay for every time we watch a movie, etc, and this will put greater pressure against optical media. I have enough DVDs, BDs and UHDs to last me until…..

Of course, if that prediction about the world being on fire in 2023 comes true- nevermind!

I either buy or record about anything I want. I have thousands of DVDs, so tomorrow if OTA went away, I am good. Also if OTA is not free any longer, I am sure many will do without. Even here on the coast, I know several that cannot get OTA so they watch what is free on the Roku or Firestick, which there are hundreds of channels. With Pluto, Xumo, STIRR, Plex, and others, there are plenty of free programming. Yes there are ads but OTA and cable have plenty of ads too.

 

[mwdxer1]

I found a blog at Solid Signal that might shed some light on the subject:

ATSC 3.0 stumbles again - The Solid Signal Blog

That's right, another bit of bad news threatens to derail the whole thing.

blog.solidsignal.com

If it encrypts, that will kill OTA TV for sure. The reason the 15-20% watch OTA is it is free. Scrambling the signal is not going to help. People will continue to watch free streaming, pay for cable, satellite or whatever. When the Big Dish signals were scrambled, it died.
One thing OTA could do is to continue to offer free OTA, but 1.0, or lower 3.0 quality. If you want the 4K or better, you have to pay for it.
Are old TV shows going to 4K? I really doubt it. Many of the diginets now are only SD.

 

[harshness]

I either buy or record about anything I want. I have thousands of DVDs, so tomorrow if OTA went away, I am good.

Ignoring that your personal needs are rather unique, say you wanted a recording of the Rose Festival parade. How might you do that?

 

[Justin Hill]

If it encrypts, that will kill OTA TV for sure. The reason the 15-20% watch OTA is it is free. Scrambling the signal is not going to help. People will continue to watch free streaming, pay for cable, satellite or whatever. When the Big Dish signals were scrambled, it died.
One thing OTA could do is to continue to offer free OTA, but 1.0, or lower 3.0 quality. If you want the 4K or better, you have to pay for it.
Are old TV shows going to 4K? I really doubt it. Many of the diginets now are only SD.

I'll have to see what their true intentions are for this new format for myself...until then, I'm outta here!

 

[harshness]

Are old TV shows going to 4K?

That depends significantly on what you mean by "old TV shows".

If you're talking black and white, I'd say no way. Soap Opera Effect has been pretty damaging to the idea of converting B/W. Anything that was captured in 16mm probably wouldn't be worth it either.

I think we're still a long way off from seeing 4K broadcast but we could all use some HD love for the popular diginets.

 

[dweber]

Orlando WESH started using DRM on their ATSC 3.0 broadcast on February 1, 2023. Silicondust is currently working with A3SA to get DRM to work on their HDHomerun receivers. Below is the WESH response.

As of yesterday Hearst corporate in conjuction with the ATSC 3.0 Pearl group requested that we turn on DRM encryption. Some atsc 3.0 receivers do no work with this function. -- WESH Engineering


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[harshness]

Orlando WESH started using DRM on their ATSC 3.0 broadcast on February 1, 2023.

DRM has been a part of the specification (A/362) for almost three years. The latest revision to A/362 was 11 months ago, so any changes should come as no surprise but it certainly deserves some real-world testing. Silicon Dust and, to a greater extent Tablo, have both been crying about this for a while. Tablo hasn't even released their ATSC 3.0 capable product yet. They both need to step up and get it done if it is interfering with real-world use. I'm dubious that the keys must be held in hardware as Tablo asserts.

The stations seem to be falling all over themselves to make adoption of the NEXTGEN TV standard fail by adding all these new "features" that seem to create only problems. At least this one won't "not work" with existing displays like Sinclair's HDR standard.