Channels ATSC 3.0 DRM Support

Channels DVR Server
#15

I do agree with you to a point, but look, what if they would’ve put all their resources behind Cablecard DRM? That’s now a dead end. I think they should let the ATSC 3.0 issue settle before sinking a lot of money into that unless that becomes a dead end too.

And given there’s no gateway network tuner right now and currently released HDhomerun tuners..who knows if they’ll ever become 3.0 DRM network tuners that other apps beside itself can access(there’s still some question about what will happen once ATSC 1.0 ceases)

The incoming FCC won’t be as customer friendly as the current one is, so I have no doubt that DRM will be the future of ATSC for now, but even with that said there’s still a lot of unknow with DRM ATSC and I would prefer they wait until a lot of questions are answered before diving headend without knowing how deep or shallow the pool is.

1 Like
#16

DRM support will never happen as long as Channels DVR is a networked device. Unless the ATSC 3.0 cartel changes their methods, the only devices that could play DRM media are ones that directly hook to your devices via HDMI and, I assume, DisplayPort, which are HDCP compliant. (DVI and USB-C/Thunderbolt are also compliant, but seldom used in my world)

This isn't a decision by the devs here, it was something thrust upon us by the greedy media owners after ATSC 3.0 was already rolled out.

Also, Channels DVR would be useless as a non-networked device.

My guess right now is we are at the mercy of the FCC and the Media Cartels, we can only hope at this point for something to change.

3 Likes
#17

that's only $24k/year (300 x $80) though

#18

Correct, as in open networked device. A closed group of devices within your LAN, like the product line Zapperbox is developing, would pass muster.

2 Likes
#19

Any links or more info on that?

#20
1 Like
#21

Man, that article makes me doubt Zapperbox even more. Especially this:

ZapperBox’s founder, Gopal Miglani, noted when DRM support was added that, “Our team has invented a proprietary process that enables us to field-provision content decryption in a highly secure manner. This achievement underscores the longevity of our hardware platform, the remarkable versatility of our software, and ingenuity of our team. While maintaining the security of the NEXTGEN TV ecosystem, we are committed to safeguarding our customers’ investments in their ZapperBox M1, which will stand as the unparalleled NEXTGEN TV DVR and gateway for years to come.”

It sounds like a sales pitch to fools. Field-provision content decryption?

3 Likes
#22

He must speak very carefully to maintain his NEXTGEN TV approval. Also, because marketing.

Like he says it's a closed "secure" system, and I doubt very much third-party apps like Channels DVR will ever be able to access it much less do anything with its encrypted files.

Their DVR is in the early development stages, but the CEO has posted in the TiVo Community Forum and seems to see TiVo capabilities as a benchmark target. Meanwhile, users report the tuners perform well.

1 Like
#23

I'm still convinced that by the time Nextgen TV is ready for public consumption, the OTA stations across the country will have already ditched their towers and switched to streaming over the internet.

Not sure if I want to be right or wrong about that, btw. Both scenarios have their advantages and disadvantages.

1 Like
#24

Yea, I agree, but, is there really a market big enough to support a company selling these devices? As it seems now, Nextgen TV is such a pain, why would anyone ever bother with all the technical limitations just to get their local OTA channels? (besides people like us on this forum)

Also, their prices are a bit steep IMO.

#25

Because local broadcast channels on Youtube TV, Hulu live, or cable tv cost greater than $70/month, and OTA local TV is free with the right hardware. If all you really want is local broadcast channels, those devices are a bargain.

1 Like
#26

Historically their main business has been embedded systems for TV manufacturers. The market for the Zapperbox products is certainly a smaller niche: the relatively tiny market segment that includes TiVo, HD HomeRun, and apps like Channels DVR and Plex. But if NEXTGEN TV attracts enough consumers (and that's a big "if", I agree) then Zapperbox may be the only one left standing in that segment, because the NEXTGEN TV consortium seems very hostile to gateway solutions like HD HomeRun.

#27

OTA has always been "buy a TV and turn it on". It's not that anymore. Even the current generation OTA is more than many people want to deal with (rescans and such).

Most will simply go elsewhere for entertainment. Sad really, those airwaves belong to me, not the media cartels. They should be forced to keep it "as is" as far as DRM or go elsewhere, not the other way around.

2 Likes
#28

So, has anybody actually bought a Zapperbox and successfully gotten its ATSC3.0 channels to work with Channels DVR? In St. Louis I get the ATSC3.0 versions of FOX, ABC and CW all unencrypted. CBS and NBC are encrypted, so my HDHomeRun can’t get those.

1 Like
#29

Zapperbox products do not work with Channels DVR, and as I wrote above they probably never will. Zapperbox DVR and client boxes are a self-contained system designed to comply with NEXTGEN TV consortium security rules

1 Like
#30

Yesterday i got a model, Converter X1, it with offline DRM function, also atsc3.0 channels function well, for other function how to test, i need more time to test the DVR function.

#31

In STL as well, I have the HDHomerun 4k tuner but never check, are the 3 stations now broadcasting in 4k? I found them hard to come in with them all being on one tower

#32

I actually don’t know! I get channels 102.1, 130.1, and 111.1 but my 4K TV doesn’t indicate if they’re 4K or not. Maybe the TV is up converting? Both the 3.0 and 1.0 versions show 3840x2160/60p

#33

Theres no OTA 4K channels out there bar a few low powered ones in Idaho so...I'm not too sure what you're talking about

1 Like
#34

Nobody is broadcasting 4k, it's all upscaled at the headend before.