Agree, DRM on off air is not the way to go. We the people have the power. Seniors and the poor with little or no internet will be the losers!!!😢😢😢😢 They need to be protected from big business.
The FCC is supposed to regulate the public broadcast airwaves for the public interest, convenience and necessity and DRM goes against that. It should be disallowed on the broadcast bands. They can still use 5G broadcast for encrypted content.
Thanks Lon for keeping us informed. I'm only here because I started looking into the HD Home Run option to configure and use with the Plex Channels feature. So annoyed that DRM for OTA is even a thing. Doesn't seem right. Keep up the good fight and I'll be here watching ever update.
Consumers have been abandoning the cable companies for years. So now big corporations are following their own age-old advice: If you can't beat them, take them over. That's what DRM is all about.
What I don't understand is that DRM has been defeated on HDMI/HDCP so any devices, even being a non gateway atsc 3 device, can have its output captured. So why spend so much resources on something you can't protect anyway.
Really@@sweepingdenver ? I'll put it this way. The only way that they will really sue is if you take that recording and post it on the internet for public viewing or rebroadcast it for public viewing. Otherwise recording broadcasts and tv programming whether it be encrypted or unencrypted becomes private viewing options and there is a thing called Fair Use for that. Look at Cable and Satellite Television. That's encrypted but it's still recordable and capturable and I have never heard of anyone getting sued over recording off television, etc. Now if you try to do it through the HDMI Cable and not the RCA audio video composite then it will prompt a warning screen but if you are using the RCA audio video composite to capture and record , no. I have recorded and captured from satellite television and that is DRM encrypted and I use the RCA audio video composite with My Video Capturing Device and nothing ever happened to me.
Public airwaves are just that "public". If "we" cannot view them, then take their license to broadcast away. NO DRM. Cable is different as you "subscribe" to view certain channels and your cable box controls everything. You don't get anything if "they" don't have your cable box "number". NO DRM.
The OTA broadcasters realized that the real money is in the cable/streaming rebroadcast fees. The ATSC 3.0 transition is an opportunity to force viewers to get their signal through cable/streaming if they want to be able to use DVR capability. ABC, NBC, Fox, and CBS can afford to spend millions on lobbying, while the individual viewers can't compete with that.
Even the disclaimer before NFL games that are broadcast OTA includes something along the lines of "this broadcast is for private use of its audience." Which means it can be recorded and watched freely by said viewer. They don't rely one bit on revenue from streaming. They rely on advertising live in real-time. And as far as serial programming goes, no one is pirating OTA broadcasts anymore, what with the advent of streaming services. Every single show on TV that is pirated and put up on torrent sites is done so from a streaming platform, and IS NOT from an OTA capture. What I believe this whole scenario really is is just a small investment into something that will fail. Roll out of ATSC 1.0, make everything 3.0, and get people pissed off enough to just abandon it and go back to either cable or streaming. It got people to stop buying music in physical form. Physical video media is almost dead. OTA is almost dead.
Speaking of Plex, nothing would make them happier to get rid of DVR stuff and to get rid of personal media libraries. They push their stupid low-budget free content and push their stupid conglomeration/integration of third-party streaming services.
I wholeheartedly support your campaign to get the best possible deal for consumers from all the parties involved in drafting the ATSC 3.0 regulations. I'll also admit that I'm ambivalent about the status of TV in the future. There's scarce programming on TV I actually want to watch, and so much material is available through other media sources that interests me more.
NO DRM on broadcast TV, the encryption would only lock us OTA viewers out and encourage the broadcasters to use a pay perview model on all sporting events and first release movies. We have all cut the cord for a reason
Very good video.. My only comment is that encryption is a direct violation of public airways broadcasting. One rule of even licensed HAM operators is no encryption if I remember. So if they can let us do that then major broadcasters should not be able to do this either. It should be illegal even for cable broadcasters to do the same, but they do..
Thank you for explaining a complex, multi-faceted issue in plain language. I'm in favor of no DRM although I'm not opposed to purchasing an ATSC 3.0 gateway device that is software/firmware updateable that offers the ability to record broadcast TV programs and a has a TV program guide.
I live in NYC and using my HDHomerun with the Freecast app I can watch the ATSC 3.0 encrypted broadcasts for CBS (102.1) and Telemundo (147.1). NBC doesn’t work, the screen remains black but for everything else Freecast works for me right now.
No "Deceptive Revenue Maximization" (DRM for short) please on ota signals, I feel for those who need ota as cable etc isn't a functional option, but if this is the future of tv stations I'd rather we abolish ota tv, revoke all the spectrum, and put it as new unlicenced spectrum, it will grt much more better use for the PUBLIC's benefit that way
I would like to express my thanks to the WDAF Fox station in Kansas City for their decision to omit DRM from their ATSC 3.0 broadcasts. This allows me to continue enjoying their content seamlessly using my HDHomeRun Flex 4K tuner.
14:11 What happens to those of us who REFUSE to connect TV to Internet because it only seems to make the TV less helpful? We don’t want ads in our TV menus so we don’t connect it to the Internet.
so public broadcasters do receive some money from the gov for being a public service. I could see online DRM as grounds for lawsuits to cut these subsidies since these networks will no longer be providing a free over the air service They will need to ask if the loss of that money is worth the drm.
Apparently the broadcasters and network owners are at odds right now over who gets to make deals for the local channels with youtube tv, Hulu+live, Fubo TV ETC. Which is telling me where this ATSC 3.0 thing is going. I get this odd feeling broadcasters will charge you to watch or Record there ATSC 3.0 broadcasts. We consumers won't like that.
No to DRM and thanks for parsing all of the details concerning OTA. Also a little rant. I am tired of the actions of a minuscule fraction of a percentage of people causing the rest of us to be treated like untrustworthy criminals. There are certain situations where security measures are needed. This is not one of them. Plus the old greed factor. I am willing to pay my fair share and I know that number is different for everyone. But too many companies just do not have a limit on how much profit is enough.
The A3SA rules plus with a geatway should also apply after the transition! !! I aleady signed the petition. Should II singed it again stating the above? What can we do to influence the A3SA as they are not the FCC?
Hi Lon, I own a Samsung 4K ATSC 1.0 TV that can only play 4K movies when attached to a 4K player. So let me get this straight. As long as my TV is connected to wi-fi, will I be able to pick up DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 TV with a Zapper Box or something similar? According to Rabbit Ears, only the CBS and NBC-owned stations in Los Angeles are encrypted and only the ABC-owned station and a sister CBS-owned sister station have not filed with the FCC.
I thought a few months ago the FCC ruled that DRM wasnt allowed to be used at the startup phase of atsc 3.0 but it seems that broadcasters are ignoring this. and thus should be given fines and such for not following the rules.
Absolutely no DRM! I can't even believe it's a thing! I have an over-the-air antenna, Home run prime, along with Plex and I am extremely happy with this setup. This nonsense would just kill my whole setup which makes me extremely pissed!
DRM of OTA broadcasts goes against the original plan to provide free over the air local content when HD kicked in. Let's keep up the fight to encrypt the public airwaves.
Awesome report Lon. I think that FCC will do whatever BIG CORPORATE wants and decides. Maybe broadcasters need to stop paying their actors 1 million per TV episodes which probably fuels their need to milk more and more money out of viewers that are fleeing traditional broadcast television in favour of internet streaming. Between the broadcasting of fake news to being forced to watch 40 mins of commercials per 1 hour show that are mostly reruns of reruns for a hefty premium is no longer acceptable. An industry of multi-millionaire sitcom actors and sport athletes is the problem resulting in people making 5 figures paying for those that make 7 figures is not a sustainable business model. Insatiable greed has taken over our planet and is sickening to witness.
Greetings: I contend that the FCC setting free use of public spectrum to include provision that all use not require payment for unhindered use of any broadcasts.
If the FCC is not going to treat television as a public service, usable to transmit emergency broadcast information, why are they licensing television stations? It is not over the air broadcasting if an internet connection is required to receive and decode the signal. Encrypted signals belong on secure cable, not wasting limited television bandwidth.
Any DRM is bad, broadcast should be provided in such a way as to reach the largest possible audience. FCC's own rules say as much... DRM in any form would restrict access even if only by a little.
Obviously the best thing for the consumer is not having DRM at all but I believe that the current problem will eventually be resolved. My main concern is that future broadcast content which has been free over the air will end up behind a pay wall. I'm thinking of events like the Super bowl and the Masters tournament. I never record anything so that part of the eqation does not matter to me.
This is stupid and when 3.0 becomes the standard DRM would be illegal as it goes against the federal requirements to have free over the air TV. As far as recording a show people have lives and in the past two or more years I never watch shows when they are aired or commercials. If this is what they are going to do just stick to 1.0 because this is not an improvement .
Allowing broadcasters to enable DRM is the same slippery slope as giving government more power. That power will eventually be used against the consumer/voter to restrict them.
I always thought that by law we have the right to be able to view local over the air channels. Without interruptions!!! I guess public isn't public anymore. NO DRM
the problem is that DRM is another chapter of what can do with the newer system, the biggest problem i think it's that LG never did extensive long terms test to realize those problems that are having the TV for decode signals encrypted or even with the not possibility of have a rooftop antenna and have all the TV on home connected there but DRM does work erratically because the code of encryption is unique for every TV even if are 3 or more simultaneously tuned in the same channel. a bad implementation, a good system but a terrible implementation of the chapter thanks for LG who made the system
LON. ulive in new york i own the adth box that you reomcemended thank you. I update the box and added a flash drive to record atsc 3.0 it works But the drm is poop i cant take the flasj drive and play it on my pc. to me in a nutshell atc 3.0 is ok the drm is bs to me. i just hope the fcc can stop the drom crrap. and yes people my grammer is crap but gets the point accross.
You can luckily bypass the drm by using capture cards that bypass hdcp. Also note this box lacks hdcp support believe it or not.😂😂 Now in terms of watching the drm stations on the go your going to need a $100-$200 encoder.
Movie moguls fought the VCR. But Fred Rogers (Mr. Roger's Neighborhood) spoke before the Supreme Court about how important it is to allow people to record all broadcast content. They agreed with him. Someone needs to remind Congress. Show that testimony of the late Fred Rogers to Congress and the FCC.
It's a neighborly day in my beautywood. For now only ATSC1.0 signals reach my home. My neighbors are welcome to share it over my rather overbuilt wLAN.
It's a neighborly day in my beautywood. For now only ATSC1.0 signals reach my home. My neighbors are welcome to share it over my rather overbuilt wLAN.
antenna man, just wanted to say you gave us excellent information on choosing a new outdoor TV antenna. Highly recommend your skill set for others who are cutting the cord and want to get an outdoor antenna that will actually work.
Imagine what happens when these devices stop getting firmware updates, thus rendering them unable to playback content when the broadcasters periodically change their DRM keys.
They technically shouldn't need firmware updates just to grab new keys. But if that's the way they want to play it, then this technology deserves to die. No one should adopt it and it should be left to die. That's the only way they're gonna get the message that we don't want a future where ads are everywhere around us (and injected into our dreams). A petition of 10k is just going to tickle a little bit and maybe stave off the inevitable for a few years.
@@timramich Good luck getting ordinary robots to agree to this. Our jobs are so horrible that we just want to go home and sit and stare at the screen. Most people do not have an original thought in their heads and do not read anymore so do not have any other option but watch tv. All is lost. The vast majority of people are sheep to one shepherd or another. But they think they are free because they follow a different shepherd. Just stop watching tv let us all cancel our subscriptions to whatever corporation we are now enslaved to.
They don't mean that literally. You can distribute RF signals easily with an amplifier made to do so, and it has no idea about the underlying modulation and digital information that's buried in the actual analog carrier.
@@timramich An interesting thought would be, I wonder how hard it would be to build a box that receives the signal with DRM and then retransmits a copy without DRM. This way you can have rabbit ears on the other TV and watch the content.
@@timramich Heh, right? Much better that they don't restrict the technology. The tech is actually really good, an outernet of sorts which is exactly what we need for broadcast media. Internet bandwidth is saturated by video.
DRM should not be allowed on over-the-air broadcasts. Any channels that encrypt their signal should not be allowed to collect rebroadcasting fees from cable companies because they're forcing viewers to use those cable companies in order to receive those broadcasts.
that's what I'm thinking I have T-Mobile 5G Home Internet that's been really reliable so far, but what if a tornado hits my area, and takes out the towers, but leaves me with power, then what are we to do for information besides radio which often times is no help at all just shoving 24/7 billboard crap, or whatnot down your throat, and the one good talk radio station here 80% of their day is syndicated radio shows like Glenn Beck that are no help me on a local level.
My thinking is that we will find our selves listening to radio plays and the like again. They used to be a thing before there was TV. Some of them were really good.
Here an idea people contact every business that advertise on these DRM encrypted networks. Tell them you can’t see their ads. Once they realize people can see the ads that they pay big $$$$ to the networks for people to see. They will stop paying the networks. Watch how fast things change when the money dries up.
Yep if there is an ATSC 1.0 feed, and an ATSC 3.0 feed that's encrypted of the same channel/s in your market(none in mine yet) then I say take photos of every local business you catch advertising on there say during the 5 or 6 o'clock news, and let them know people can't see them on the ATSC 3.0 feed because of this once the ATSC 1.0 feeds go dark, and yep the money will start to dry up for the tv stations for ads!!
The requirement to have Internet to watch over the air signals is ridiculous. My Internet went out 11/3/23 at430am. It's expected to be on tonight (11/6) at 10pm assuming they don't push it out again. How would I watch TV? 🤷♂️. It was hard enough as it is with the fire stick not loading the home screen, then the siliconedust app crashing when it couldn't download the guide data. I luckily had Kodi installed with the addon for siliconedust installed and that worked.
To add to that, there are so many issues, it will be years (if ever) for 3.0 to take over. The thought of dropping 1.0 in 5 years is crazy. That is unless they want to lose millions of OTA viewers.?
I'm not understanding how the FCC would allow a licensened TV station to require Internet to receive television broadcasts. There is still a large portion of our nation who doesn't have internet and they will be locked out.
This is a reason I don't watch TV anymore. (I cut the cord in 2004, before cord-cutting was cool.) I say that FCC should revoke the broadcast license of any broadcaster who encrypts OTA broadcasts. The broadcaster either broadcasts in the clear, without encryption, scrambling, or DRM, or they lose their privilege to broadcast over the public airwaves.
There is no reason at all for DRM, unless you want to make it much more complicated. If broadcasters don't want you to watch, they will encrypt, otherwise why would they do it? Encryption and decryption add processing overhead and complexity as we see now. They just need to remove it all together, there is zero reason to do this. 😵🤦♂
Cynically, I think the broadcasters want to get/force you to stream their feed, not get it OTA. That way they are in control of your experience, no commercial skipping allowed.
@@robertalverson3398 I think you are correct for sure. I think if it we up to them, they would just want to shut off the broadcast side and just have streaming boxes. Would save a fortune in just power costs alone. Then they can track you for sure and know exactly what your watching etc. And then force you to watch commercials and not be able to skip or anything. I really hope that the FCC steps in and stops the madness with encryption. It's free over the air broadcasts. If they want to encrypt move to cable and then charge me for it. Its suppose to be for everyone to watch who might not be able to afford new 80" top of the line TV's and special hardware. Brings me back to the days of digital TV and everyone having to get coupons for free converter boxes so they could watch TV on their older sets.
Removing DRM from ATSC 3.0 would be best for the general public, especially the economically challenged. Today it's early adopters and those that have bad ATSC 1.0 stations that are impacted. So if you are in both those categories, it really sucks.
A broadcast manager friend of mine thinks a big player behind DRM and A3SA and locking down any streaming etc are the large sports groups -- The NFL, the NBA etc who want to carefully control where their live sporting events can be seen.
They've already won that battle. In my home market (San Diego) there are zero Padres/MLB games on OTA networks - they all moved to the RSN. There are also zero NBA or NHL games - they all moved to cable. We still get NFL - but those games are slowly migrating to private streaming networks (NFLN, Amazon Prime) and I suspect will be gone from OTA after the next couple of TV agreements.
I have a great solution: Go watch the local high school games. The skill level may be lower but the teams are evenly matched making for an interesting contest.
Thank you and the antenna man for helping us fight against DRM which is very bad for us who love to watch ota antenna TV stations recorded watch later. I do have gateway sling TV tuner so I can ota on my cellphone and my fire stick. It's going very bad future when a disaster like hurricanes, tornadoes, fires earthquakes and etc. No way the reaching out to people about important information with no internet and cell service how the DRM going to work? Anyway no DRM please!!!
I have often thought that the whole DRM mess was to force external tuner box and TV set manufacturers to pay the Nextgen conglomerate big bucks for licenses rather than the content protection mantra they keep parroting.
Here's how this plays out Lon.....The BIG broadcast companies have money to pay the powers that be to side with them on this. In 5-10 years you won't be able to turn on a TV without paying, plus ads plus any upgrades such as DVR or multiple home network streams. They will keep the economically challenged quiet by subsidizing them like they currently do with cable companies. It's all about increasing profits.
I agree and to a degree it is also about control of the market. They will keep the little guy with the great new idea out of the market by making it expensive to do anything.
@@malcolden7788 People will go back to reading and sewing and knitting, and churning butter, etc. etc. Anything but watching television. The future children of the world will ask, What is Television?
They are renting the airwaves from the American people. At very minimum the primary channels including local news should be DRM free so we have a fallback when the DRM inevitably fails. I can't count on an internet connection or a cellular connection during an emergency and DRM has a history of epic failures since it's inception. If they want a place to host some "premium content" I can live with that but do it on a subchannel.
They are not "renting" airwaves - they pay nothing for it. We own the spectrum and have leased it at zero cost to broadcasters in exchange for them providing a public service - namely the emergency broadcast system and one hour of news per day. They are in breach of the deal.
@@christeague6681 No need to split hairs. Compensation is compensation whatever form it takes. If you pay for your house in fish don't think the taxman won't come.
I would never purchase a TV with ATSC3 tuner and expect the manufacture to support it for more than a year or maybe two. After that, that model won't get any more updates. Good luck with those older TV's ever to work after a year or two. Make it through the warranty period and then support will be dropped.
I was about to buy a new TV for $1000.00 but I watched you latest video, and I decided to not to purchases one until they fix the DRM. Thanks for your video update.
DRM... At least the primary channel on the licensed broadcast frequency should legally be required to be free-and-clear, unencumbered by DRM. I could see some flexibility to allow subchannels to be encrypted in order to offer additional services. The primary channel however needs to serve the public interest and the strings that come with the broadcast license.
I’m highly pissed that the ATC 3.0 in industry just not understand that the consumers do not want nor can they use DRM encryption. The requirements for an Internet connection are stupid and outrageous. In today’s world we still have a lot of non-Connected communities. These communities do not have access to the Internet as well as they are low income. this also means that they’re watching free air instead of paying for other services. This DRM encryption has nothing to do with consumers at all. It has nothing to do with piracy at all. It is only a money grab it is only design to force consumers, who cannot pay for TV to pay for free to Air television.
We are finally away from needing rabbit ears on all tv's, and now the industry wants to drag us backwards digitally requiring separate boxes per tv again....just insane.
Since the fees are so lucrative for broadcasters, does anyone think that they want to keep free OTA TV? They either want it so complicated that few will bother, and they will stay with cable/satellite or down the road, they will figure a way to charge the viewer.
Totally agree with you, re: DRM. I think it’ll have a chilling effect on both consumers and businesses alike. It could be _yet another_ example of large profitable companies extracting more value to line their pocketbooks. IMHO, the writing is on the wall: If we can’t stop or at least dramatically improve this buggy and poorly implemented DRM, then broadcast may continue to die away. I don’t know. Maybe that’s the point?
If I can't receive a signal and stream it to my tablet, broadcast is dead to me. Ultimitely a device needs to receive more than 1 signal, record them, and then stream them to my tablet or TV.
I don't understand why they are bothering with DRM, as anything broadcast ends up on the Internet within a few hours... and without commercials. Are they trying to reduce their already dwindling audience even more?
And that's why they're trying to make it harder.... for it won't happen. But we know it will.. one way or another. But most people doesn't even know a difference between a WebRip and a WEB-DL for example.
Get rid of drm completely since there was no drm with analog tv. I miss the way things were in the 90s when it came to movies, music and video games since everything was balanced. The consumers had more options and more choices compared to how it is now with limitations and restrictions.
Here in Canada the providers wanted to do away with the over the air signals but I believe the CRTC ruled against that for now. Only thing I use OTA here is 6PM news and most of the time I nod off during the news. I axed cable here 4 years ago and don't miss it. Only get 3 OTA channels with 2 being sporadic.
Why would you need to put DRM on a signal that is BROADcast for free? It’s ridiculous. A waste of time, effort, and money on everyone’s part. I still want them to roll back the end of the CableCard requirement.
There's still a lot of old HDMI cables and monitors that don't support DRM and it was a pain in the butt to try and figure out why I couldn't stream Netflix to my laptop with an external monitor plugged in or even just an old HDMI cable. ATSC 3 DRM is just more of the same kind of craziness. You shouldn't have to have any kind of tech savvy to sit down and watch a TV show or a ball game..
![[UA] Eternal Fire проти NAVI | EPL Season 20 Malta](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/chvlsDygrZM/mqdefault.jpg)
No DRM on the public airwaves. If the rights owners can't agree to that, kick them off the public airwaves.
Ditto in my location just want Antenna tv moved in Connecticut market
This should be a requirement by the FCC to broadcasters of TV and Radio.
Agree, DRM on off air is not the way to go. We the people have the power. Seniors and the poor with little or no internet will be the losers!!!😢😢😢😢 They need to be protected from big business.
💯💯💯
The FCC is supposed to regulate the public broadcast airwaves for the public interest, convenience and necessity and DRM goes against that. It should be disallowed on the broadcast bands. They can still use 5G broadcast for encrypted content.
Thanks Lon for keeping us informed. I'm only here because I started looking into the HD Home Run option to configure and use with the Plex Channels feature. So annoyed that DRM for OTA is even a thing. Doesn't seem right. Keep up the good fight and I'll be here watching ever update.
Consumers have been abandoning the cable companies for years. So now big corporations are following their own age-old advice: If you can't beat them, take them over. That's what DRM is all about.
No DRM. Public airwaves need to remain open.
No DRM on the public airwaves!! Thank you for covering this Lon!
Imagine DRM when the TV broadcasts are being used for Emergency Alert System. Yet another reason to require unencrypted television broadcast.
What I don't understand is that DRM has been defeated on HDMI/HDCP so any devices, even being a non gateway atsc 3 device, can have its output captured. So why spend so much resources on something you can't protect anyway.
They have to learn that lesson the hard way. They have always had a stick up them about program recording ever since the VCR and it never worked.
Some of it is legal maneuvering. It’s easier to sue people for violating IP rights if they bypass DRM, even if it is easy to actually do so.
Really@@sweepingdenver ?
I'll put it this way.
The only way that they will really sue is if you take that recording and post it on the internet for public viewing or rebroadcast it for public viewing.
Otherwise recording broadcasts and tv programming whether it be encrypted or unencrypted becomes private viewing options and there is a thing called Fair Use for that. Look at Cable and Satellite Television. That's encrypted but it's still recordable and capturable and I have never heard of anyone getting sued over recording off television, etc. Now if you try to do it through the HDMI Cable and not the RCA audio video composite then it will prompt a warning screen but if you are using the RCA audio video composite to capture and record , no. I have recorded and captured from satellite television and that is DRM encrypted and I use the RCA audio video composite with My Video Capturing Device and nothing ever happened to me.
Thanks Lon! NO DRM is the best outcome.
Class action lawsuit is needed.
Love to go with anyone to sue
I am low income and FORCING me to pay expensive Internet for airwaves I already own is a class action waiting to happen
@@CrimsonTideGuy complain to the FCC to stop DRM Incription.
Public airwaves are just that "public". If "we" cannot view them, then take their license to broadcast away. NO DRM. Cable is different as you "subscribe" to view certain channels and your cable box controls everything. You don't get anything if "they" don't have your cable box "number". NO DRM.
The OTA broadcasters realized that the real money is in the cable/streaming rebroadcast fees. The ATSC 3.0 transition is an opportunity to force viewers to get their signal through cable/streaming if they want to be able to use DVR capability. ABC, NBC, Fox, and CBS can afford to spend millions on lobbying, while the individual viewers can't compete with that.
Even the disclaimer before NFL games that are broadcast OTA includes something along the lines of "this broadcast is for private use of its audience." Which means it can be recorded and watched freely by said viewer. They don't rely one bit on revenue from streaming. They rely on advertising live in real-time. And as far as serial programming goes, no one is pirating OTA broadcasts anymore, what with the advent of streaming services. Every single show on TV that is pirated and put up on torrent sites is done so from a streaming platform, and IS NOT from an OTA capture. What I believe this whole scenario really is is just a small investment into something that will fail. Roll out of ATSC 1.0, make everything 3.0, and get people pissed off enough to just abandon it and go back to either cable or streaming. It got people to stop buying music in physical form. Physical video media is almost dead. OTA is almost dead.
Speaking of Plex, nothing would make them happier to get rid of DVR stuff and to get rid of personal media libraries. They push their stupid low-budget free content and push their stupid conglomeration/integration of third-party streaming services.
No DRM
So where is the link to the petition... why would you not put it in the show notes?
I wholeheartedly support your campaign to get the best possible deal for consumers from all the parties involved in drafting the ATSC 3.0 regulations. I'll also admit that I'm ambivalent about the status of TV in the future. There's scarce programming on TV I actually want to watch, and so much material is available through other media sources that interests me more.
NO DRM on broadcast TV, the encryption would only lock us OTA viewers out and encourage the broadcasters to use a pay perview model on all sporting events and first release movies. We have all cut the cord for a reason
Very good video.. My only comment is that encryption is a direct violation of public airways broadcasting. One rule of even licensed HAM operators is no encryption if I remember. So if they can let us do that then major broadcasters should not be able to do this either. It should be illegal even for cable broadcasters to do the same, but they do..
Make it work like ATSC 1.0, with better quality!
Thank you for explaining a complex, multi-faceted issue in plain language. I'm in favor of no DRM although I'm not opposed to purchasing an ATSC 3.0 gateway device that is software/firmware updateable that offers the ability to record broadcast TV programs and a has a TV program guide.
I was really looking forward to getting a 3.0 DVR. Now there are many roadblocks. I’ll stick to 1.0. It works fine.
I live in NYC and using my HDHomerun with the Freecast app I can watch the ATSC 3.0 encrypted broadcasts for CBS (102.1) and Telemundo (147.1). NBC doesn’t work, the screen remains black but for everything else Freecast works for me right now.
No "Deceptive Revenue Maximization" (DRM for short) please on ota signals, I feel for those who need ota as cable etc isn't a functional option, but if this is the future of tv stations I'd rather we abolish ota tv, revoke all the spectrum, and put it as new unlicenced spectrum, it will grt much more better use for the PUBLIC's benefit that way
I would like to express my thanks to the WDAF Fox station in Kansas City for their decision to omit DRM from their ATSC 3.0 broadcasts. This allows me to continue enjoying their content seamlessly using my HDHomeRun Flex 4K tuner.
14:11 What happens to those of us who REFUSE to connect TV to Internet because it only seems to make the TV less helpful? We don’t want ads in our TV menus so we don’t connect it to the Internet.
they can NOT force citizens to do commerce to enable tv airwaves. People own it and see constitutional lawsuit from that
Where is the link? I don't see any...
No DRM and open-source Dolby AC-4 so ffmpeg can decode it
so public broadcasters do receive some money from the gov for being a public service. I could see online DRM as grounds for lawsuits to cut these subsidies since these networks will no longer be providing a free over the air service They will need to ask if the loss of that money is worth the drm.
charge them 100x the current cost for licenses to fund new licenses for free OTA from stations willing to air free!
I was in the market for an HD 4k HomeRun should i tap on the breaks?
Apparently the broadcasters and network owners are at odds right now over who gets to make deals for the local channels with youtube tv, Hulu+live, Fubo TV ETC. Which is telling me where this ATSC 3.0 thing is going. I get this odd feeling broadcasters will charge you to watch or Record there ATSC 3.0 broadcasts. We consumers won't like that.
No to DRM and thanks for parsing all of the details concerning OTA.
Also a little rant. I am tired of the actions of a minuscule fraction of a percentage of people causing the rest of us to be treated like untrustworthy criminals. There are certain situations where security measures are needed. This is not one of them.
Plus the old greed factor. I am willing to pay my fair share and I know that number is different for everyone. But too many companies just do not have a limit on how much profit is enough.
Okay; DRM on cable. Understandable. Satellite encoding; okay, understandable too. But over-the-air encoding? Forget it!! Enough is enough!!! Greed destroys.
The A3SA rules plus with a geatway should also apply after the transition! !! I aleady signed the petition. Should II singed it again stating the above? What can we do to influence the A3SA as they are not the FCC?
Hi Lon, I own a Samsung 4K ATSC 1.0 TV that can only play 4K movies when attached to a 4K player. So let me get this straight. As long as my TV is connected to wi-fi, will I be able to pick up DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 TV with a Zapper Box or something similar? According to Rabbit Ears, only the CBS and NBC-owned stations in Los Angeles are encrypted and only the ABC-owned station and a sister CBS-owned sister station have not filed with the FCC.
No the box (zapper, ADTH, etc) needs to be connected to Wifi in order to decrypt - at least at the moment.
@@LonSeidman Thanks! Lol I took notice you had to nuance your answer with “at least at the moment!”
Starting to think we need VCR's to make a come back...
some of us never left, still got mine
@@CrimsonTideGuy I still have one too, but it not in the best shape anymore.
I thought a few months ago the FCC ruled that DRM wasnt allowed to be used at the startup phase of atsc 3.0 but it seems that broadcasters are ignoring this. and thus should be given fines and such for not following the rules.
Zero encryption, period. It is fundamentally unacceptable.
No DRM, it is 😢😢😢😢
Absolutely no DRM! I can't even believe it's a thing! I have an over-the-air antenna, Home run prime, along with Plex and I am extremely happy with this setup. This nonsense would just kill my whole setup which makes me extremely pissed!
If the ATSC3 DRM broadcasts aren't able to be decoded, aren't the broadcasters violating the station ID rules?
DRM of OTA broadcasts goes against the original plan to provide free over the air local content when HD kicked in. Let's keep up the fight to encrypt the public airwaves.
Awesome report Lon. I think that FCC will do whatever BIG CORPORATE wants and decides. Maybe broadcasters need to stop paying their actors 1 million per TV episodes which probably fuels their need to milk more and more money out of viewers that are fleeing traditional broadcast television in favour of internet streaming. Between the broadcasting of fake news to being forced to watch 40 mins of commercials per 1 hour show that are mostly reruns of reruns for a hefty premium is no longer acceptable. An industry of multi-millionaire sitcom actors and sport athletes is the problem resulting in people making 5 figures paying for those that make 7 figures is not a sustainable business model. Insatiable greed has taken over our planet and is sickening to witness.
of course, the commisioners come from telecom and cable industry
Public airwaves should have no DRM. It in the public interest to be able to tune to news and weather events.
Greetings:
I contend that the FCC setting free use of public spectrum to include provision that all use not require payment for unhindered use of any broadcasts.
Government in America has never been the problem.
Corporate & Special Interest Control of the government IS the problem.
If the FCC is not going to treat television as a public service, usable to transmit emergency broadcast information, why are they licensing television stations? It is not over the air broadcasting if an internet connection is required to receive and decode the signal. Encrypted signals belong on secure cable, not wasting limited television bandwidth.
Any DRM is bad, broadcast should be provided in such a way as to reach the largest possible audience. FCC's own rules say as much... DRM in any form would restrict access even if only by a little.
Obviously the best thing for the consumer is not having DRM at all but I believe that the current problem will eventually be resolved. My main concern is that future broadcast content which has been free over the air will end up behind a pay wall. I'm thinking of events like the Super bowl and the Masters tournament. I never record anything so that part of the eqation does not matter to me.
This is stupid and when 3.0 becomes the standard DRM would be illegal as it goes against the federal requirements to have free over the air TV. As far as recording a show people have lives and in the past two or more years I never watch shows when they are aired or commercials. If this is what they are going to do just stick to 1.0 because this is not an improvement .
NO DRM at all,we paid ENOUGH for replacing the ATSC 1 transition! TV's,Tunerboxes,Antennas,RG6 cables!
Allowing broadcasters to enable DRM is the same slippery slope as giving government more power. That power will eventually be used against the consumer/voter to restrict them.
I always thought that by law we have the right to be able to view local over the air channels. Without interruptions!!! I guess public isn't public anymore. NO DRM
Really tired of the FCC not requiring ATSC 3.0 and Digital FM radio to have open/free standards.
the problem is that DRM is another chapter of what can do with the newer system, the biggest problem i think it's that LG never did extensive long terms test to realize those problems that are having the TV for decode signals encrypted or even with the not possibility of have a rooftop antenna and have all the TV on home connected there but DRM does work erratically because the code of encryption is unique for every TV even if are 3 or more simultaneously tuned in the same channel. a bad implementation, a good system but a terrible implementation of the chapter thanks for LG who made the system
Lon...if I get a new TV with a Nextgen tuner (Hisense u7k)...will i still be able to watch atsc 1.0 broadcasts on the new tv?
Yes it’ll support both
not for long, it will eventually be ATSC 3 only, left with no choice but to obey and pay
I would vote for NO encryption!
No encription shpuld not be allowed over the air
I don't believe a word they say. Until they get rid of DRM we the consumers are screwed.
LON. ulive in new york i own the adth box that you reomcemended thank you. I update the box and added a flash drive to record atsc 3.0 it works But the drm is poop i cant take the flasj drive and play it on my pc. to me in a nutshell atc 3.0 is ok the drm is bs to me. i just hope the fcc can stop the drom crrap. and yes people my grammer is crap but gets the point accross.
You can luckily bypass the drm by using capture cards that bypass hdcp. Also note this box lacks hdcp support believe it or not.😂😂
Now in terms of watching the drm stations on the go your going to need a $100-$200 encoder.
Take away their right to broadcast over the public air waves if they do not remove drm
Amen
It seems like the FCC is ceding control of the airwaves to the private broadcast companies and their consortium, as if the air waves belong to them.
Lon thank you for being the voice of this community. No DRM.
And less complicated!
How is this legal? These are public airwaves. Thank you for bringing this to everyone's attention!
It is legal because the people with the big bucks say it is legal. The FCC doesn't regulate in the public interest.
It shouldn’t be.
Movie moguls fought the VCR. But Fred Rogers (Mr. Roger's Neighborhood) spoke before the Supreme Court about how important it is to allow people to record all broadcast content. They agreed with him.
Someone needs to remind Congress. Show that testimony of the late Fred Rogers to Congress and the FCC.
I had no idea mr rodgers made the vcr possible. Mr rodgers was a great man. 😢😢
Is there a recording on UA-cam about that?
It's a neighborly day in my beautywood. For now only ATSC1.0 signals reach my home. My neighbors are welcome to share it over my rather overbuilt wLAN.
It's a neighborly day in my beautywood. For now only ATSC1.0 signals reach my home. My neighbors are welcome to share it over my rather overbuilt wLAN.
Great video as always. Let's keep up the fight against DRM!
antenna man, just wanted to say you gave us excellent information on choosing a new outdoor TV antenna. Highly recommend your skill set for others who are cutting the cord and want to get an outdoor antenna that will actually work.
Imagine what happens when these devices stop getting firmware updates, thus rendering them unable to playback content when the broadcasters periodically change their DRM keys.
my gess get it and grab it.
They technically shouldn't need firmware updates just to grab new keys. But if that's the way they want to play it, then this technology deserves to die. No one should adopt it and it should be left to die. That's the only way they're gonna get the message that we don't want a future where ads are everywhere around us (and injected into our dreams). A petition of 10k is just going to tickle a little bit and maybe stave off the inevitable for a few years.
@@timramich Good luck getting ordinary robots to agree to this. Our jobs are so horrible that we just want to go home and sit and stare at the screen. Most people do not have an original thought in their heads and do not read anymore so do not have any other option but watch tv. All is lost. The vast majority of people are sheep to one shepherd or another. But they think they are free because they follow a different shepherd. Just stop watching tv let us all cancel our subscriptions to whatever corporation we are now enslaved to.
I'm sure that firmware updates will be readily available, as long as you continue to pay the subscription fees.
Continue to pay? Who's paying now?
One antenna per screen, in the age of networking - unbelievably short sighted.
They don't mean that literally. You can distribute RF signals easily with an amplifier made to do so, and it has no idea about the underlying modulation and digital information that's buried in the actual analog carrier.
@@timramich An interesting thought would be, I wonder how hard it would be to build a box that receives the signal with DRM and then retransmits a copy without DRM. This way you can have rabbit ears on the other TV and watch the content.
Crazy. Hello FFMPEG, how's it going today? How's your friend over there VLC doing? Ready to defend fair use? Of course you are.
@@duracell80 VLC, eww
@@timramich Heh, right? Much better that they don't restrict the technology. The tech is actually really good, an outernet of sorts which is exactly what we need for broadcast media. Internet bandwidth is saturated by video.
The public airwaves for OTA free TV, and Radio should be DRM FREE, period, end of story!!
No DRM. Thanks Lon for your work on this issue.
It’s all a bunch of BS. They want total control of whatever you do. Great video Lon. Over the air stations should be free period.
DRM should not be allowed on over-the-air broadcasts. Any channels that encrypt their signal should not be allowed to collect rebroadcasting fees from cable companies because they're forcing viewers to use those cable companies in order to receive those broadcasts.
DRM is a non starter. It's only there to completely kill the product to force more people to subscription streaming services.
What happens if you don't have Internet or Internet goes down.
that's what I'm thinking I have T-Mobile 5G Home Internet that's been really reliable so far, but what if a tornado hits my area, and takes out the towers, but leaves me with power, then what are we to do for information besides radio which often times is no help at all just shoving 24/7 billboard crap, or whatnot down your throat, and the one good talk radio station here 80% of their day is syndicated radio shows like Glenn Beck that are no help me on a local level.
My thinking is that we will find our selves listening to radio plays and the like again. They used to be a thing before there was TV. Some of them were really good.
Here an idea people contact every business that advertise on these DRM encrypted networks. Tell them you can’t see their ads. Once they realize people can see the ads that they pay big $$$$ to the networks for people to see. They will stop paying the networks. Watch how fast things change when the money dries up.
makes perfect sence
Yep if there is an ATSC 1.0 feed, and an ATSC 3.0 feed that's encrypted of the same channel/s in your market(none in mine yet) then I say take photos of every local business you catch advertising on there say during the 5 or 6 o'clock news, and let them know people can't see them on the ATSC 3.0 feed because of this once the ATSC 1.0 feeds go dark, and yep the money will start to dry up for the tv stations for ads!!
Thanks for keeping us up to date on this mess. No DRM is the only ideal.
The requirement to have Internet to watch over the air signals is ridiculous. My Internet went out 11/3/23 at430am. It's expected to be on tonight (11/6) at 10pm assuming they don't push it out again. How would I watch TV? 🤷♂️. It was hard enough as it is with the fire stick not loading the home screen, then the siliconedust app crashing when it couldn't download the guide data. I luckily had Kodi installed with the addon for siliconedust installed and that worked.
To add to that, there are so many issues, it will be years (if ever) for 3.0 to take over. The thought of dropping 1.0 in 5 years is crazy. That is unless they want to lose millions of OTA viewers.?
I'm not understanding how the FCC would allow a licensened TV station to require Internet to receive television broadcasts. There is still a large portion of our nation who doesn't have internet and they will be locked out.
No DRM.
This is a reason I don't watch TV anymore. (I cut the cord in 2004, before cord-cutting was cool.) I say that FCC should revoke the broadcast license of any broadcaster who encrypts OTA broadcasts. The broadcaster either broadcasts in the clear, without encryption, scrambling, or DRM, or they lose their privilege to broadcast over the public airwaves.
I agree. In many places there are not enough open channels for all the broadcasters so weeding a few out would be fine.
All current atsc 3.0 tvs are screwed... what a waste of money....
We need to start boycotting all stations that have encrypted stations!!!
There is no reason at all for DRM, unless you want to make it much more complicated. If broadcasters don't want you to watch, they will encrypt, otherwise why would they do it? Encryption and decryption add processing overhead and complexity as we see now. They just need to remove it all together, there is zero reason to do this. 😵🤦♂
Cynically, I think the broadcasters want to get/force you to stream their feed, not get it OTA. That way they are in control of your experience, no commercial skipping allowed.
@@robertalverson3398 I think you are correct for sure. I think if it we up to them, they would just want to shut off the broadcast side and just have streaming boxes. Would save a fortune in just power costs alone. Then they can track you for sure and know exactly what your watching etc. And then force you to watch commercials and not be able to skip or anything. I really hope that the FCC steps in and stops the madness with encryption. It's free over the air broadcasts. If they want to encrypt move to cable and then charge me for it. Its suppose to be for everyone to watch who might not be able to afford new 80" top of the line TV's and special hardware. Brings me back to the days of digital TV and everyone having to get coupons for free converter boxes so they could watch TV on their older sets.
Removing DRM from ATSC 3.0 would be best for the general public, especially the economically challenged. Today it's early adopters and those that have bad ATSC 1.0 stations that are impacted. So if you are in both those categories, it really sucks.
A broadcast manager friend of mine thinks a big player behind DRM and A3SA and locking down any streaming etc are the large sports groups -- The NFL, the NBA etc who want to carefully control where their live sporting events can be seen.
They've already won that battle. In my home market (San Diego) there are zero Padres/MLB games on OTA networks - they all moved to the RSN. There are also zero NBA or NHL games - they all moved to cable. We still get NFL - but those games are slowly migrating to private streaming networks (NFLN, Amazon Prime) and I suspect will be gone from OTA after the next couple of TV agreements.
I have a great solution: Go watch the local high school games. The skill level may be lower but the teams are evenly matched making for an interesting contest.
@@christeague6681in arizona, las vegas, and utah their teams are available over the air due to the fallout of rsns.
As a HDHomerun user, no DRM! I have a cablecard in my home and love it. I know this may go away too. Support what consumers want.
Thank you and the antenna man for helping us fight against DRM which is very bad for us who love to watch ota antenna TV stations recorded watch later. I do have gateway sling TV tuner so I can ota on my cellphone and my fire stick. It's going very bad future when a disaster like hurricanes, tornadoes, fires earthquakes and etc. No way the reaching out to people about important information with no internet and cell service how the DRM going to work? Anyway no DRM please!!!
I have often thought that the whole DRM mess was to force external tuner box and TV set manufacturers to pay the Nextgen conglomerate big bucks for licenses rather than the content protection mantra they keep parroting.
Shitty TiVo been charging monthly fees for years for the use of your personal DVR. NO ONE SAID SHIT ABOUT THAT.
More money to be made for crap for content.This is why I dumped fish.Cut channels And put nothing in it's place.They would also churn programs
Here's how this plays out Lon.....The BIG broadcast companies have money to pay the powers that be to side with them on this. In 5-10 years you won't be able to turn on a TV without paying, plus ads plus any upgrades such as DVR or multiple home network streams. They will keep the economically challenged quiet by subsidizing them like they currently do with cable companies. It's all about increasing profits.
I agree and to a degree it is also about control of the market. They will keep the little guy with the great new idea out of the market by making it expensive to do anything.
Eventually they will cause the decimation of all TV and its final collapse. TV WILL BE NO MORE. However, other forms of entertainment will arise.
@@malcolden7788 People will go back to reading and sewing and knitting, and churning butter, etc. etc. Anything but watching television. The future children of the world will ask, What is Television?
They are renting the airwaves from the American people. At very minimum the primary channels including local news should be DRM free so we have a fallback when the DRM inevitably fails. I can't count on an internet connection or a cellular connection during an emergency and DRM has a history of epic failures since it's inception. If they want a place to host some "premium content" I can live with that but do it on a subchannel.
They are not "renting" airwaves - they pay nothing for it. We own the spectrum and have leased it at zero cost to broadcasters in exchange for them providing a public service - namely the emergency broadcast system and one hour of news per day. They are in breach of the deal.
@@christeague6681 No need to split hairs. Compensation is compensation whatever form it takes. If you pay for your house in fish don't think the taxman won't come.
I would never purchase a TV with ATSC3 tuner and expect the manufacture to support it for more than a year or maybe two. After that, that model won't get any more updates. Good luck with those older TV's ever to work after a year or two. Make it through the warranty period and then support will be dropped.
this is how we as a people really talk, REFUSE the new equipment, If nobody is watching nationwide, they will go bankrupt
I was about to buy a new TV for $1000.00 but I watched you latest video, and I decided to not to purchases one until they fix the DRM. Thanks for your video update.
DRM... At least the primary channel on the licensed broadcast frequency should legally be required to be free-and-clear, unencumbered by DRM. I could see some flexibility to allow subchannels to be encrypted in order to offer additional services. The primary channel however needs to serve the public interest and the strings that come with the broadcast license.
No DRM!
I’m highly pissed that the ATC 3.0 in industry just not understand that the consumers do not want nor can they use DRM encryption. The requirements for an Internet connection are stupid and outrageous. In today’s world we still have a lot of non-Connected communities. These communities do not have access to the Internet as well as they are low income. this also means that they’re watching free air instead of paying for other services. This DRM encryption has nothing to do with consumers at all. It has nothing to do with piracy at all. It is only a money grab it is only design to force consumers, who cannot pay for TV to pay for free to Air television.
Thanks Lon! I am glad you are here to report on this!
We are finally away from needing rabbit ears on all tv's, and now the industry wants to drag us backwards digitally requiring separate boxes per tv again....just insane.
Since the fees are so lucrative for broadcasters, does anyone think that they want to keep free OTA TV? They either want it so complicated that few will bother, and they will stay with cable/satellite or down the road, they will figure a way to charge the viewer.
Totally agree with you, re: DRM. I think it’ll have a chilling effect on both consumers and businesses alike. It could be _yet another_ example of large profitable companies extracting more value to line their pocketbooks.
IMHO, the writing is on the wall: If we can’t stop or at least dramatically improve this buggy and poorly implemented DRM, then broadcast may continue to die away. I don’t know. Maybe that’s the point?
Maybe we should just stop watching tv all together
I have a large DVD collection, so if OTA/Cable/Internet all went away, I could still enjoy entertainment for the rest of my life.
Back to HELL with DRM 🎉😡🫡
No DRM. Put a solid state battery in it. That’s always a positive answer in tech.
If I can't receive a signal and stream it to my tablet, broadcast is dead to me. Ultimitely a device needs to receive more than 1 signal, record them, and then stream them to my tablet or TV.
I don't understand why they are bothering with DRM, as anything broadcast ends up on the Internet within a few hours... and without commercials. Are they trying to reduce their already dwindling audience even more?
And that's why they're trying to make it harder.... for it won't happen. But we know it will.. one way or another. But most people doesn't even know a difference between a WebRip and a WEB-DL for example.
Get rid of drm completely since there was no drm with analog tv. I miss the way things were in the 90s when it came to movies, music and video games since everything was balanced. The consumers had more options and more choices compared to how it is now with limitations and restrictions.
Here in Canada the providers wanted to do away with the over the air signals but I believe the CRTC ruled against that for now. Only thing I use OTA here is 6PM news and most of the time I nod off during the news. I axed cable here 4 years ago and don't miss it. Only get 3 OTA channels with 2 being sporadic.
Why would you need to put DRM on a signal that is BROADcast for free? It’s ridiculous. A waste of time, effort, and money on everyone’s part.
I still want them to roll back the end of the CableCard requirement.
There's still a lot of old HDMI cables and monitors that don't support DRM and it was a pain in the butt to try and figure out why I couldn't stream Netflix to my laptop with an external monitor plugged in or even just an old HDMI cable. ATSC 3 DRM is just more of the same kind of craziness. You shouldn't have to have any kind of tech savvy to sit down and watch a TV show or a ball game..