More ATSC 3.0 Talk

All of our main channels are sent as ATSC 3.0 here in Houston, and my HD Homerun can pick it up and they do play fine in Channels. My less powerful set tops don't handle the AC4 very well, but that's another story. My only problem is, one of my local stations recently decided they wanted to encrypt it, so yeah... it's completely unavailable to me now. It's not 4K, none of them are, but 1080p60 is still better than the 1080i or 720p the ATSC 1.0 channels carry.

I wish it was something that could be fixed by Channels or HD Homerun but from what I understand it's the A3SA group that is encouraging the providers to encrypt and not really giving us a proper solution to decrypt them. The best thing I know to do is to write, email, comment whatever you can do to your local station and their parent company to not encrypt the channels. It's all about greed, they would rather you pay for cable/streaming service because they make them pay broadcast fees. If we all just started using antennas, they would stop being able to ask as much for those fees.

1 Like

The FCC was accepting comments on ATSC 3, including this issue, back in the summer. Probably that period has closed, but it's worth looking at.

In my case, I have 4 local stations who have consolidated their ATSC 3 tests at a point less than 10 miles from my house, where the ATSC 1 for two channels is behind mountains or trees. Right now, only one channel has DRM turned on, and their ATSC 1 station is easily tuned so that's okay. But the two stations that the ATSC 1 is problematic for would kill me if they enable DRM.

Eventually, if ATSC 3 progresses out of test phase, the ATSC 3 channels will move back to the main antennas and I'm going to lose ABC year round and CBS 7 months out of the year (due to leaves) regardless, but NBC's DRM would take them away, too.

I'm wondering how much it would cost fancybits to license the DRM and if that could be an optional pass through to us?

So you're missing out on an experimental broadcast, but not any 4K content. (It should also be said, some broadcasters are pulling their ATSC3 broadcasts because it's too soon and not well implemented; and some manufacturers (LG) are no longer going to ship ATSC3 tuners.)

In short, anything related to ATSC3 is still "experimental". The landscape will not settle until the FCC mandates sunsetting ATSC1; and until such a time, you would best be served by treating ATSC3 as experimental, just as the broadcasters and manufacturers are doing.

Also, Channels' lack of DRM support for ATSC3 is not unique. No one has ATSC3 DRM support in their DVRs.

1 Like

I dont think it is a cost issue. its probably to do with the use (misuse) it may attract.

1 Like

It's not really a "licensing" issue. The A3SA (the group handling ATSC3 DRM) still has yet to even finalize the standards. How can Channels even attempt to implement DRM if the standard doesn't yet properly exist?

1 Like

That's apparently not completely true, though this a very UGLY solution:

There's a draft standard for DRM; it's implemented in the tuner linked above (and probably elsewhere). No, it's not necessarily the final word, but it's probably pretty close. We can always hope the FCC says you can't use DRM on your main channels (at least) and the issue goes away. But I'm not betting on it.

1 Like

That's a "gateway" device, which is different from HDHomeRun tuners (and the software that uses them); apples and oranges.

1 Like

Disagree about ATSC 3.0 being experimental. The DRM is, but they don't have to use it, and are being encouraged and choosing to.

You can disagree if you want, but I think LG's recent action is very clear on what they think.

1 Like

Technologically, yes. Functionally, no... they have to do all the same things. Yes, likely some conversations between the tuner and the DVR need to be spec-ed out that would happen all inside this box. And maybe discussions about how that would all work are happening behind closed doors. But you can bet there will be $$$ involved.

No, not the same. Gateway devices have their DRM keys in ROM in the hardware. Devices like the HDHR need a software-based solution to the keys.

So on the surface you may think it's the same; but it is completely different.

They don't have to be the same keys, and likely shouldn't be, i.e. the tuner (e.g. the HDHomeRun) should decrypt the OTA video using baked-in keys, and then either it, or the DVR, re-encrypt it, if that's necessary (and likely will be insisted on by content providers). But, to your point, that's another set of requirements.

1 Like

That's not how it works. If you want to understand what the DRM situation is regarding networked ATSC3 tuners (like the HDHR line), then you should really read the extensive thread on their own hardware forums. In short, until the A3SA has figured out how DRM is going to be handled, Channels has no chance of even trying to be part of the solution.

https://forum.silicondust.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=77618

1 Like

No. The HDHR are gateway devices because they transmit over a network and are not connected directly to a TV via HDMI.

2 Likes

Apologies, I guess I got my terms reversed. The device mentioned above has HDMI out, which means it is a different class of device than the HDHR tuners.

My terms may be backwards, but the point still stands.

NBC, My58; which are Hearst Broadcasting; and ABC in the Sacramento, CA all use DRM. I can't watch these channels using my HD Homerun 4K Flex or use my Channels DVR with these stations. Very frustrating! I pay for equipment and subscriptions and can't use it. What gives?

1 Like

Do these stations not simulcast ATSC1 feeds along with their ATSC3 feeds? If they do, you are not actually missing out on anything. And if they do not, then I believe they are in violation of FCC standards.

1 Like

Yes, I can watch these in ATSC1.0, however, I want to watch these in 4K, ATSC3.0. This is why I have all 4K equipment. The greedy broadcasters are preventing us from using the 4K equipment.

1 Like

None of the ATSC 3.0 stations are broadcasting in 4K.

3 Likes