ATSC 3 Archives - Lon Seidman & Lon.TV Blog

Multiple Studies Show DRM Encourages Rather than Restricts Piracy!

admin — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 12:40:52 +0000

I recently observed the National Association of Broadcasters criticizing Major League Baseball and Netflix for placing sports content behind paywalls. This critique is a notable contradiction when considering the broadcast industry’s current efforts to encrypt public airwaves. While broadcasters claim to be the center of community connection by delivering free games to millions, their recent actions suggest a shift toward a business model more closely resembling the streaming platforms they criticize – including locking down over the air content with DRM.

In my latest video, we take a look at whether or not DRM actually works in stopping piracy. Spoiler alert: it doesn’t – in fact there’s strong evidence to suggest it actually increases piracy.

In my home state of Connecticut, for instance, broadcast TV fees for cable subscribers have risen from $8 in 2018 to over $48 per month today. This cost exceeds a standard Netflix subscription and reflects the price consumers are paying for access to local stations via cable. While an antenna remains a traditional method for receiving these signals at no cost, the industry is moving toward a new standard known as NextGen TV. This transition involves digital rights management, or DRM, which requires consumers to purchase specific high-end televisions or expensive external (and barely functional) tuning boxes. This shift also restricts the use of gateway devices that currently allow viewers to watch over-the-air television on various screens throughout their homes.

I find the current trajectory of the broadcast industry mirrors the mistakes made by the music industry two decades ago. During the early 2000s, record labels were on the ropes with a huge decline in revenue as consumers desired digital music that simply wasn’t available. Eventually the labels were strong-armed into selling music online but insisted on DRM to restrict how and where consumers could play purchased music. This lack of interoperability led many consumers to favor piracy for its convenience. It was only after the industry moved toward DRM-free audio that its financial health improved. Today, the music industry sees record revenues because it no longer restricts the devices or platforms consumers use to listen to their products.

Research supports the idea that restrictive encryption often backfires. A 2003 study conducted by HP in partnership with MIT concluded that DRM features were not effective at combating piracy. The researchers noted that content must eventually be converted into an unprotected form, such as sound waves or light, to be consumed—a vulnerability often called the analog hole which is easily exploited. Furthermore, data from the University of Toronto in 2013 showed that removing DRM led to a 10% increase in music sales and a 30% increase for back-catalog items. A 2010 study from Seoul National University similarly found that the inconveniences of DRM reduced legal demand and increased piracy.

The broadcast industry’s current approach to DRM lacks ubiquity. At present, the encryption used for NextGen TV only functions on Android-based devices, leaving users of Roku, Apple TVs, PCs, iPhones, iPads and Xbox devices unable to decode the content. This is a significant departure from successful platforms like Netflix or Spotify, which ensure their encrypted content works across nearly every available device. By narrowing the range of compatible hardware, broadcasters risk alienating their remaining audience.

The Federal Communications Commission is currently weighing the implementation of these encryption standards. I believe it is important for the public to communicate the potential inconveniences of this technology to their congressional representatives. While the industry highlights the technical benefits of the new standard, the restrictive nature of the accompanying encryption is often omitted from the conversation.

The historical data from the music industry suggests that when legal access becomes more difficult than the alternative, the industry itself suffers the most. The outcome of the current deliberations at the FCC will determine whether broadcast television remains a broadly accessible public resource or becomes a more restricted and hardware-dependent medium.

ATSC 3 Update: Dueling Surveys & Contact Your Congressperson!

admin — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 11:00:00 +0000

In my latest ATSC 3.0 update video, I take a look a dueling consumer surveys from the Consumer Technology Association (CTA) opposing TV tuner mandates and another from broadcasters suggesting consumers will be more than happy to buy expensive hardware when the rug is pulled out from under us.

Pearl TV, an organization representing broadcasters, recently published a survey indicating that most viewers would be willing to purchase a low-cost converter box, estimated at around $60, rather than lose access to free television. When looking at current market behavior on platforms like Amazon, consumers are choosing tuners priced as low as $30 that include recording capabilities—a feature the proposed $60 DRM-compatible basic boxes would lack according to Pearl.

Pearl’s survey results released so far lack the “cross-tabs” that would reveal all of the questions asked and answered. Only a small amount of data appears in the Pearl TV slide deck, yet the methodology slide reveals the median time to complete the survey was 16 minutes. Clearly they are holding a lot of data back.

On the other side of the issue, the Consumer Technology Association (CTA), which represents electronics manufacturers, argues against government mandates that would force the inclusion of expensive ATSC 3.0 tuners in every television. Their research suggests that while antenna usage has seen a slight uptick to about 15% of households, awareness of the NextGen TV brand remains low. Only 5% of respondents claimed to be familiar with the term, and the vast majority had never seen the official logo. This matches my own observations in retail environments, where the technology is rarely a primary concern for consumers compared to the availability of streaming applications on a particular device.

As the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) prepares for its annual trade show, the lobbying effort has intensified. Recently, 91 members of the House of Representatives signed a letter pressuring the FCC to move forward with the transition. This indicates that congressional offices are hearing primarily from broadcast interests. My review of the signers shows a bipartisan group of representatives from across the country, many of whom may not be fully briefed on the technical limitations and costs these encryption standards impose on their constituents.

My suggestion? It’s time to reach out to your member of Congress. My suggestion would be to forward along what you’ve already filed with the FCC. Short of that you can use some sample language that I put together here. If you’re looking for a one stop shop for finding and contacting your representatives, Democracy.io has a helpful utility for doing so.

The FCC remains cautious. Currently, Commissioner Olivia Trusty is the only official scheduled to appear; she is set to deliver a brief 10-minute presentation on ATSC 3.0 at the Las Vegas Convention Center.

With consumer adoption stuck in neutral, thanks to a complicated DRM encryption scheme, broadcasters are now going to rest their hopes on political pressure to try and force their private regulatory regime on the American people. That’s why it’s important for all of us to educate our representatives on what is really going on.

ATSC 3.0 Update: More DRM Nonsense Filed with the FCC

admin — Tue, 17 Mar 2026 04:04:37 +0000

The broadcast industry’s ongoing effort to encrypt the public airwaves is currently awaiting a decision from the Federal Communications Commission. In a recent ex-parte letter to the FCC, broadcasters cited the US Trade Representative’s 2025 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy report to support their push for the ATSC 3.0 encryption standard. The report focuses heavily on live sports and the revenue lost to global piracy – but none of it indicates broadcast TV signals are being stolen.

See more in my latest ATSC 3.0 update video!

The report’s introduction references the NFL’s broadcasting agreements with networks like CBS, Fox, and NBC, which run through 2033. These contracts were signed without any provisions or assurances requiring future signal encryption, suggesting the league does not view over-the-air broadcasting as a primary piracy vulnerability.

The report provides three specific instances of piracy, including the FIFA World Cup, a mention of European soccer games being pirated and the 2017 Mayweather-McGregor fight. While the FIFA World Cup game was broadcast on television stations here in the USA, it is likely that it was pirated off of encrypted sources along with the other European soccer matches. And the Mayweather-McGregor fight was an encrypted Pay Per View event.

The government’s report cites data from Irdeto, a European company specializing in signal encryption for satellite and streaming providers. A review of their technical literature shows that modern piracy relies on methods like stealing session tokens, purchasing compromised account credentials on the dark web, or utilizing a technique known as CDN leeching.

These methods bypass the physical complexities of installing antennas to intercept local signals, demonstrating that for pirates encrypted content is easy to pirate than the unencrypted broadcast signals.

Furthermore, Irdeto’s guidance emphasizes the necessity of multi-DRM systems to ensure a frictionless viewing experience across different platforms. Currently, ATSC 3.0 DRM only supports Widevine, a Google technology. This single-DRM approach limits compatibility, leaving devices like Apple TV, Roku, Xbox, and standard computers unable to decode the encrypted broadcasts.

The push for encryption appears closely tied to the economics of broadcast retransmission fees. In Connecticut, for example, cable subscribers currently pay around $48.30 a month strictly for local channel access. Encrypting the over-the-air signals forces consumers to either maintain these cable subscriptions or purchase new, proprietary decoding hardware. Ahead of the upcoming NAB show, industry executives have discussed a proposed $60 tuner box. However, this device is expected to function solely as a tuner without DVR or gateway capabilities and cost three times as much as current tuning devices that do include DVR functions.

Broadcasters also point to the A3SA encoding rules, which currently permit time-shifting and recording. But these allowances apply only to content that is actively simulcast with the older ATSC 1.0 standard. Once the simulcast requirement expires, broadcasters provide are not committing to restricting or disabling recording capabilities entirely, shifting control of public airwave usage to a private entity.

The FCC is presently collecting public feedback on a separate but related sports broadcasting docket (26-45), which examines the impact of broadcasting practices on consumers and local market obligations. The comment period for this specific docket remains open for roughly another week, offering another venue for the public to submit their observations regarding how signal encryption may affect access to local sports broadcasts.

ATSC 3.0 TV Encryption Update: The Final Arguments are In..

admin — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 15:03:41 +0000

The final arguments regarding the encryption of over-the-air television have been filed with the FCC, and now it’s in the Commission’s hands. In my latest ATSC 3.0 analysis video, we take a look at how broadcasters responded to encryption concerns.

After reviewing hundreds of pages of documents, it appears the industry’s rebuttal to consumer concerns relies heavily on dismissing documented technical failures as mere anecdotes while asserting that encryption is necessary for the future of broadcast media.

The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has characterized reports of DRM failure—such as devices refusing to tune channels—as “early deployment friction” that does not justify stalling a national transition. They argue that individual complaints do not reflect systemic flaws. Yet, this stance contradicts the experience of users who have found that encryption often breaks the basic functionality of a television.

For instance, the A3SA, the body managing the encryption keys, argues that software-based devices require internet-based updates for bug fixes. This requirement introduces a significant dependency on internet connectivity for a medium that is marketed as being free and accessible over the air.

I recently demonstrated this vulnerability when an ADTH set-top box, which marketing materials claimed did not require an internet connection, failed to tune encrypted channels during a snowstorm. This inability to access weather information during an emergency challenges the industry’s assurance that content protection does not impede public safety messaging.

Beyond technical reliability, the industry posits that DRM is essential to combat piracy and secure content for sports broadcasting. The A3SA cited a media report claiming billions in losses due to piracy, yet the article in question focused on cable and streaming theft rather than the unauthorized capture of over-the-air signals.

Historically, DRM has been less about stopping piracy—which remains rampant despite encryption—and more about siloing users into specific hardware and software platforms. By making free over-the-air reception more difficult, broadcasters may be incentivizing consumers to stick with paid cable or streaming packages. Furthermore, claims that major sports leagues will withhold content without encryption are not supported by the current landscape, where broadcast contracts are being renewed for extended periods without such mandates being public.

There is also a significant question regarding the neutrality of the A3SA, which acts as the sole gatekeeper for approving tuning devices. While the organization claims to be neutral, it is comprised of major broadcast entities. This structure effectively allows the industry to pick winners and losers in the hardware market.

Manufacturers of popular gateway devices, such as Silicon Dust’s HDHomeRun, have been unable to secure certification under the current regime. The A3SA’s standards remain opaque and protected by non-disclosure agreements, preventing independent verification by even the FCC and effectively locking out devices that distribute signals across a home network to non-Android devices.

Ironically, while the industry argues that DRM protects consumers from the security risks of illicit streaming, the approved hardware itself presents security concerns. The ADTH box mentioned earlier was found to be running an Android security patch level from 2021, leaving it vulnerable to years of known exploits.

It seems unlikely the FCC will mandate a hard transition to ATSC 3.0 in the near term given the abysmal consumer adoption rates. The current ecosystem is too fragmented, and the cost and complexity of encryption have slowed adoption to a crawl.

And ultimately for consumers, they’re really not getting as much as they did during the prior transition. Back in the early 2000s TV viewers went from analog standard definition signals to digital high definition ones – a huge jump in visual fidelity. While ATSC 3.0’s HEVC video encoding is certainly noticeable for enthusiasts, I doubt most mainstream consumers will notice much of change.

I believe a probable outcome is a “frozen conflict” where the FCC ends the simulcast mandate, allowing stations to voluntarily switch to 3.0 if they choose, while potentially authorizing more efficient video codecs like MPEG-4 for the existing ATSC 1.0 standard.

This would allow the legacy standard to improve and remain viable, effectively leaving ATSC 3.0 to succeed or fail on its own merits without a government mandate forcing consumers to upgrade. We may end up with a better-looking version of the television service we already have, while the next-generation standard struggles to find its footing.

ATSC 3.0 DRM Opponents Make Their Case to the FCC

admin — Tue, 10 Feb 2026 12:52:16 +0000

The transition from the current over-the-air television standard to NextGenTV, or ATSC 3.0, continues to generate significant debate, particularly regarding the decision by many broadcasters to encrypt their signals.

In my latest video, I take a look at the filings from organizations and individuals opposing the implementation of Digital Rights Management (DRM) on the public airwaves.

This issue moved from theoretical to practical for me recently during the Super Bowl. I was unable to tune into the game over the air because my local NBC affiliate had encrypted their channel, and the legacy ATSC 1.0 signal was unreliable at my location, forcing me to stream the event instead.

I submitted my own filing to the FCC docket, effectively mirroring the arguments I raised in my prior video on this topic regarding the industry’s justification for encryption. To circumvent file size limitations on the docket, I attached a PowerPoint presentation with embedded video evidence, a method that allows for the submission of multimedia documentation under the 100-megabyte limit. This approach is useful for anyone wishing to demonstrate the real-world impact of these restrictions, such as devices failing to decrypt channels they are theoretically certified to receive.

One of the most comprehensive filings came from Public Knowledge, a consumer advocacy group. They commended the FCC for scrutinizing the issue but raised substantial concerns about the A3SA, the authority managing the encryption program. Public Knowledge argued that the A3SA operates without meaningful external oversight, maintaining confidential licensing terms and opaque decision-making processes. They contend this entity acts as a private gatekeeper to the public airwaves without accountability to consumers or public interest stakeholders.

Public Knowledge also highlighted the potential for consumer confusion arising from the current certification regime. There are now two distinct logos for consumers to navigate: the NextGenTV logo and the A3SA logo. A device might carry the NextGen TV certification, like the HDHomeRun gateway I use, yet lack the ability to decrypt content. Conversely, a device like the Zapperbox may have A3SA certification for decryption but lack the NextGenTV designation. During a recent visit to a major electronics retailer, I observed that neither logo was displayed on television sets that support the new standard, suggesting that this certification system has yet to effectively reach the consumer marketplace.

Furthermore, Public Knowledge drew a parallel between the current situation and the “broadcast flag” rule from the previous digital transition. They argued that the A3SA certification requirements essentially function as a new, more sophisticated broadcast flag, allowing broadcasters to dictate which devices can receive programming and potentially restricting recording capabilities. They also reminded the Commission that the FCC’s 2017 order to begin the ATSC 3.0 transition emphasized that encrypted programming should not require special equipment supplied by the broadcaster, a standard the current regime may be failing to meet.

Opposition also came from within the broadcast industry itself. Weigel Broadcasting, which operates stations reaching a vast majority of US households, filed comments expressing concern over the direction taken by larger broadcasting consortiums. Weigel presented evidence suggesting that some competitors view the new standard primarily as a vehicle for monetization, such as integrating gambling platforms or treating the spectrum as a financial asset rather than a public service. They acknowledged that the current implementation of DRM has created adoption hurdles and suggested that if encryption must exist, it should not require a persistent internet connection—a requirement that has already caused functionality issues with some commercially available tuners as noted in my prior video.

The Consumer Technology Association (CTA), which represents device manufacturers, also weighed in. While their filing focused largely on opposing a mandate for ATSC 3.0 tuners in all televisions, they acknowledged the friction caused by DRM. This is a complex position for the CTA, as the encryption technology being used is owned by Google, a major industry player and CTA member, yet the implementation is harming member companies like SiliconDust (also a member). Their filing recommends that the Commission continue to monitor the intersection of DRM and the new standard, a notable admission from an organization that typically advocates against government intervention in their industry.

Similarly, the NCTA, representing cable and internet providers, cited encryption as a complicating factor that adds cost and technical challenges to the transition. They argued that these complexities support their stance against a forced transition to the new standard, noting that the need to support new audio and interactive formats is already a heavy burden without the additional layer of decryption requirements.

For those who have experienced issues with encrypted channels or malfunctioning hardware, the opportunity to place these experiences on the record is closing. The reply deadline for this docket is February 18. Under FCC rules, new filings at this stage must be in direct response to arguments already present in the record. This provides a narrow window for consumers to submit evidence countering the claims made by broadcasters, such as documenting instances where “offline” DRM failed to function as advertised. The record is currently being shaped by these final arguments, and the volume and specificity of these replies may influence the Commission’s next steps.

You can get more information about how to file here. I also did a video on the topic here.

ADTH’s ATSC 3.0 Box Woes Kill the Industry’s Arguments Regarding Over the Air TV Encryption

admin — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 13:16:22 +0000

I’ve been spending the last few days reading through the filings in the FCC’s ATSC 3.0 docket now that the comment period has closed, trying to understand how broadcasters, device makers, and industry groups are framing the next phase of the over-the-air television transition.

While I was doing that, I went upstairs to check on my own ADTH tuner, a device that’s supposed to handle encrypted ATSC 3.0 channels without needing an internet connection. It wasn’t working. Encrypted channels wouldn’t tune at all, and the box was throwing content protection errors that hadn’t been there before.

In my latest analysis piece, I talk about how widespread problems with this box tuning encrypted channels popped up just as the industry was saying there were no concerns with DRM.

That problem sent me down a familiar path. ATSC 3.0 is the planned successor to today’s ATSC 1.0 broadcast standard, and on paper it brings technical improvements. In practice, the transition has been complicated by broadcasters choosing to encrypt free, over-the-air signals. That decision has narrowed consumer choice and added layers of complexity that simply didn’t exist before. The industry’s assurances that this system is mature and reliable don’t line up with what I’m seeing in my own home.

One of the filings I reviewed came from ADTH itself. The company strongly supports the transition and argues that there are no real technical barriers to consumer devices receiving encrypted broadcasts. Encryption and digital rights management, they say, are routine in modern electronics.

That’s hard to square with my experience. After repeated errors, I tried a factory reset. Instead of fixing anything, the device dropped into a boot loop, endlessly scanning channels and rebooting. Even with an internet connection restored, it refused to recover. At that point it stopped being a TV tuner and effectively became a brick.

What made this more than a minor inconvenience was timing. We were in the middle of a significant snowstorm, the kind of situation where over-the-air television has historically been a reliable source of local information. Because the encrypted channels wouldn’t tune, that information simply wasn’t available on this device. And this doesn’t appear to be an isolated issue. I’ve heard from viewers and seen reports on Reddit and AVS Forum from people around the country whose boxes stopped working around the same time. Some even reported that disconnecting the internet made their tuners work again, which raises uncomfortable questions about how these systems are actually operating.

At the same moment consumer devices were failing, the group that oversees the encryption system, the A3SA, told the FCC it has seen no evidence of approved devices failing to work with encryption. They also suggested that any reported issues are generally resolved with firmware updates. That response glosses over a basic problem: firmware updates require an internet connection. Requiring internet access just to watch free, over-the-air television undermines one of broadcast TV’s core purposes, while adding cost and fragility.

The A3SA also describes itself as a “neutral, standards-based administrator.” From what I’ve seen, that neutrality is questionable. The group is made up of major broadcasters and has effectively decided which manufacturers can and can’t participate. SiliconDust’s HDHomeRun, a widely used network tuner, has been denied approval, while other devices with similar technical characteristics have been cleared.

Another theme running through the filings is piracy. Broadcasters cite tens of billions of dollars in losses and argue that encryption is necessary to protect their content. When you dig into the examples they reference, though, the picture changes. One high-profile piracy case they cite involved stealing encrypted signals from cable and satellite providers, not rebroadcasting free over-the-air signals.

Encryption, it appears, inconveniences only those who are viewing content lawfully – not the pirates.

Broadcasters also warn that without encryption they risk losing premium sports programming. Yet recent rights deals tell a different story. The NFL, NBA, MLB, NASCAR, and major college conferences have all committed to long-term agreements that keep marquee events on broadcast television for years to come. These deals were struck without any guarantee that over-the-air signals would be encrypted, which undercuts the argument that encryption is essential to retaining top-tier content.

The FCC has also raised questions in this filing round about consumer rights, particularly the long-standing right for consumers to record broadcasts at home for personal use. That right was established decades ago, but encryption complicates it. Circumventing DRM, even for lawful personal recording, can be illegal. The A3SA argues that internal rules already protect home recording, but those assurances are tied to current simulcasting requirements that may disappear. Once they do, the only remaining safeguards would be voluntary commitments from broadcasters whose financial incentives don’t necessarily align with consumer flexibility.

Underlying all of this is a business reality that the National Association of Broadcasters acknowledged more directly in its own filing. Encryption is about protecting retransmission fees, the charges cable and streaming providers pay to carry broadcast channels. Those fees have risen sharply over the years, and making free reception less convenient creates pressure to return to paid services. That strategy may make sense from an industry perspective, but it runs counter to the idea of broadcast spectrum as a public resource.

There’s also nothing in the current framework that limits encryption to a single system. The ATSC admits in their filing that multiple, incompatible schemes could emerge, adding yet another layer of confusion for viewers and device makers alike. At that point, the promise of ATSC 3.0 as a straightforward upgrade starts to look like something else entirely.

After reading the docket and dealing with a tuner that worked one day and failed the next, I’m left with the sense that encryption over the public airwaves is creating problems faster than it’s solving them. Broadcasters were granted access to spectrum at no cost, with the understanding that they would serve the public interest. Turning free television into a fragile, tightly controlled experience doesn’t seem consistent with that mission. I plan to file a reply in the FCC proceeding during the response window, and there’s more in these filings worth unpacking.

Stay tuned for more and see my full ATSC playlist here!

My First Cord Cutting / ATSC 3 Update of 2026

admin — Tue, 13 Jan 2026 14:27:13 +0000

In the days leading up to the CES show and throughout the week in Las Vegas, several cord cutting news items related to the ATSC 3.0 over the air TV standard were announced. In my latest video, I provide a more in-depth overview of these developments that I touched on briefly during my CES Dispatch series.

Watch the update here!

As a recap, a central issue remains DRM encryption over the new ATSC 3.0 broadcast standard. Broadcasters are pushing to lock down over-the-air signals, limiting how viewers can receive and use content that has traditionally been freely accessible. While they say this is to prevent piracy, the real outcome is that it pushes consumers to expensive cable and streaming plans to maintain recording and time shifting features they enjoy today.

This matters because retransmission fees charged by broadcasters continue to rise at almost an exponential rate. In my area, the Broadcast TV fees are now $48.30 per month – and that’s before other cable charges. Even the most basic cable subscription will now cost consumers more than $60 monthly. Of course using an antenna to receive television is completely free.

Shortly after I began asking viewers to download and share their Comcast rate cards, Comcast removed the broadcast TV fee line item from their published rates entirely. The company says this was done to simplify pricing, but the effect is reduced transparency. The costs haven’t disappeared; they’ve simply been folded into higher base prices.

At CES, Pearl TV announced what it described as an affordable ATSC 3.0 converter box program. This is positioned as a way to lower the barrier to entry for consumers and manufacturers, but it closely resembles a similar failed effort announced in 2022 that never materialized.

The underlying root cause of Pearl’s troubles with consumer adoption hasn’t changed. Encryption and certification requirements add cost and complexity in a market that is already small. Even the proposed “affordable” devices are expected to cost under sixty dollars, still roughly double the price of many ATSC 1.0 tuners (compensated affiliate link) that include DVR functionality.

The certification process itself remains a problem. Pearl TV and the A3SA encryption body are private entities made up of the same major broadcasters, effectively controlling which devices are allowed to receive encrypted signals and ultimately be sold to consumers. This introduces a layer of private regulation on top of what has traditionally been governed by FCC standards alone.

Another announcement hinted at some movement on gateway devices, which take an antenna signal and distribute it across a home network. After years of delays, A3SA says encrypted gateway functionality is now working on a limited number of products, including the ZapperBox and an upcoming ADTH device. These solutions, however, are expensive and tightly constrained. ZapperBox requires multiple expensive proprietary devices for multi-TV households, and the ADTH approach is limited to Android and Fire TV platforms, excluding market leader Roku.

Visiting the ATSC booth at the CES show made it clear how confusing this ecosystem has become. Devices carried different combinations of NextGen TV and A3SA certifications, each with different implications for compatibility and functionality. By contrast, current ATSC 1.0 devices work simply because they can receive the signal, without needing approval from a private consortium.

There may be signs of easing tensions. An interview with SiliconDust CEO Nick Kelsey suggested that support for encrypted ATSC 3.0 signals could eventually come to HDHomeRun devices without additional hardware. That would be a meaningful shift, though it still leaves unanswered questions about support on non-Android platforms and the broader role of DRM on public airwaves.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr addressed these issues during a CES discussion, emphasizing the public interest obligations tied to broadcast licenses. He noted that broadcasters unwilling to meet those obligations have other distribution options, from cable to online platforms, and raised the possibility of revisiting how spectrum is allocated if public interest standards are not upheld. Those comments echo questions raised by the FCC in its current ATSC 3.0 docket, particularly around whether encryption serves consumers or primarily protects broadcaster revenue.

That docket remains open for public comment, with additional opportunities to respond once broadcasters file their answers. The outcome is still uncertain, but it’s clear the FCC has heard our concerns and is waiting for the broadcasters to make their case as to why restricting access to the public airwaves will better serve the public.

Zapperbox’s “Big Deal” on DRM Gateway Devices is a Bigger Deal for Them Vs. Consumers

admin — Thu, 18 Dec 2025 12:53:46 +0000

Over the next few weeks we are likely to see the broadcast industry tout “gateways” that work with their private, opaque DRM regulatory framework. The first one you will hear about comes from Zapperbox. Last month they released news of a “Big Deal,” stating their device now allows in-home streaming of DRM content from one Zapperbox device to another.

While this is a “big deal” given how difficult the private, opaque DRM regulation has made the simple act of watching television, it underscores how difficult it’s been for the industry to implement a feature that has worked on ATSC 1.0 broadcasts for nearly two decades. But this is far from being at parity with the ATSC 1.0 experience – at the moment the Zapperbox solution only works with other expensive Zapperbox devices.

Unfortunately for consumers, getting functionality back that DRM has taken away will result in a significantly higher cost. Since this only works with Zapperbox devices, consumers will need to purchase a Zapperbox tuner starting at a whopping $199 for a single tuner device, $274 for a dual tuner device or $300 for a quad tuner.

On top of that, consumers need additional Zapperbox hardware for each of their televisions. Their “Zapper Mini” client device currently sells for $139 each. And if that’s not enough, Zapperbox requires a subscription for its whole home DVR features to record content for an additional $5 monthly/$29.99 a year or $240 for a lifetime subscription. Quad tuner device subscriptions cost even more. So a three TV set up will cost $552 + subscription fees.

On ATSC 1.0 devices gateway tuners like the Tablo can be purchased for far less right now with no subscription fee (compensated affiliate link) and will work with the smart TV or streaming devices consumers already have. An ATSC 1.0 SiliconDust HDHomerun also costs less than that Zapperbox (compensated affiliate link) and will work with nearly every streaming platform in existence along with mobile devices too. That’s because there is not an expensive and complicated private, opaque regulatory scheme driving up cost.

This certainly is a “big deal” for Zapperbox as the A3SA is currently picking the winners and losers in this space. But shouldn’t the market decide instead?

Check Your Cable Bill for Increased Broadcast TV Fees!

admin — Wed, 10 Dec 2025 17:44:26 +0000

If you’re still paying for cable TV, you might be seeing a sizable increase this month on your local TV fee paid to broadcasters. In my part of Connecticut that increase is substantial. According to the latest Comcast rate card, that fee is going up over $10 to $48.30 a month! It sits outside any contract pricing, so even subscribers locked into a package are getting hit with this increase.

In my latest video, we take a look at what this fee is all about and how broken the system is.

Comcast publishes very detailed rate cards that break down every charge and bundle for each of the markets they serve. But I can’t access cards from other regions without logging in as a customer. Because of that, I put together a form where viewers can share what they’re seeing locally.

I went back to an older video I made in 2018 where I had pulled this same section from the rate card. At the time, the fee was only $8. In under eight years, that’s a 500 percent increase!

Much of this money is going to large broadcast groups like Nexstar, Sinclair, Gray, and Scripps. Nexstar, for example, is currently asking regulators for permission to grow even larger by taking over Tegna. As more people cancel cable, the subscriber base that funds retransmission consent fees keeps shrinking, and the broadcasters have been raising rates to maintain the revenue they’ve grown accustomed to. Many of these companies now rely on retransmission for half or more of their income, regardless of how many people actually watch their stations.

The natural question is how broadcasters are allowed to keep raising these fees. The answer lies in the retransmission consent framework. Cable companies once had to carry every local station for free under “must-carry,” but court decisions in the 1980s and a 1992 law shifted the landscape. Broadcasters can now choose between must-carry or negotiating a paid consent agreement. Nearly all of them opt for the paid agreement. Cable providers, meanwhile, are required to negotiate in good faith and can’t walk away. Broadcasters, on the other hand, can pull their signals if they’re unhappy, and the cable company can’t replace a local station with the same network from another market. If the ABC affiliate in my area is owned by Nexstar, that’s the one Comcast has to carry—no alternatives.

Cable companies also must place local stations on their most basic tier. Years ago that tier was called “lifeline cable,” but with a $48.30 broadcast fee added on, even a “lifeline” subscription has become expensive.

The FCC is revisiting national broadcast ownership rules, which has drawn in comments from groups across the political spectrum. One proposal from the International Center for Law and Economics argues for eliminating the retransmission consent system entirely and treating broadcasters more like any other content supplier under copyright and contract law. That could allow cable companies to negotiate outside their markets and potentially reduce costs by choosing among multiple affiliates of the same network. It wouldn’t preserve local newscasts, but it could give cable companies some leverage they don’t currently have.

Streaming services like YouTube TV and Hulu are not subject to the same rules that bind cable companies. Broadcasters want that changed, which would likely raise streaming prices as well. Some smaller networks such as Newsmax have raised concerns about consolidation for a different reason: if large broadcast groups force cable operators to carry their affiliated news channels on the basic tier, smaller channels could be pushed off the lineup entirely.

There’s a lot happening at once—shrinking cable audiences, aggressive fee increases, regulatory reviews, and pressure on both distributors and programmers to keep revenue flowing. I’ll continue following these developments. In the meantime, if you have a recent cable rate card, sending it in will help build a clearer picture of what subscribers are facing across the country.

About That NAB “Keep Football on Free TV Ad”

admin — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 04:02:14 +0000

Some viewers have been seeing an ad during football games urging viewers to text a number to “keep football free,” and after looking into it more closely, it became clear that what’s happening here isn’t what the ad suggests.

The spot positions itself as a warning about streaming services taking football away, but the goal appears to be getting fans to send form emails to Congress in support of loosening broadcast ownership rules. That effort benefits the large corporations that own most local stations, not the people watching these games.

In my latest video I take you through a number of misleading statements the broadcasters are using to trick football fans into their astroturf advocacy campaign.

The ad frames streaming platforms as the cause of rising costs, but the broadcasts featured on Prime Video, Netflix, and YouTube TV are still produced by the major networks. NBC produces the Thursday night games for Amazon. CBS Sports produced the Christmas Day game that ran on Netflix. The Super Bowl that aired in 4K this past year on YouTube TV came from Fox’s production. These aren’t original productions from the streamers. They’re network broadcasts delivered by different means, often using the same crews, the same equipment, and in some cases even the same production partnerships that handle network television.

The reason networks are turning to streaming platforms versus their local broadcast affiliate partners seems tied to the economics of local broadcasting. As cable and satellite subscribers have cut back due to ever increasing costs, local stations have leaned heavily on retransmission fees from pay-TV services. Those charges have steadily risen, and they show up whether someone watches over cable, satellite, or a streaming bundle. My own cable bill before I dropped it climbed from about $33 in local TV fees last year to over $38 this year. That pattern has repeated across the country. As more customers leave cable, the fees for those who remain increase to compensate. Not a very good economic model!

At the same time, many broadcasters have been signaling that the new ATSC 3.0 television standard gives them the flexibility to charge for some over-the-air channels. They would still provide one free stream, but additional channels could become paid offerings. This isn’t speculation; companies like Sinclair have stated this directly in filings with the FCC.

Alongside that, stations have begun encrypting these new signals and limiting how viewers can access them. Devices like the HDHomeRun, which let people stream over-the-air channels around their homes, are blocked unless the manufacturer receives permission from the broadcasters. Approved devices must remain directly connected to the antenna and TV, disabling features that consumers have taken for granted—such as in-home streaming or out-of-home access while traveling. Even emergency information could become harder to receive if these encrypted signals can’t be freely tuned.

When viewers text the number in the ad, they’re funneled to a site that collects their personal information and sends a pre-written email to Congress and FCC commissioners. That email can’t be edited and specifically pushes for relaxed station-ownership limits. Those limits exist to prevent any one company from dominating local markets, but in recent years large groups have been consolidating anyway.

A pending deal between Tegna and Nexstar would knit together two already sizable owners into one of the largest station groups in the country. Sinclair’s footprint is similarly extensive. The larger these conglomerates become, the more likely they are to merge or eliminate local newsrooms, centralize weather coverage, or replace market-specific reporting with generic content produced elsewhere. Examples of these changes are already visible, from stations reducing local newscasts to companies experimenting with centralized anchorless news segments or attempting to replace entire meteorology staffs with feeds from national services.

The ad’s promise of protecting free football doesn’t reflect what’s actually happening. If anything, consolidation and encryption will make TV more expensive and less accessible.

The one area where the public still has leverage is the ongoing FCC proceeding on broadcast encryption. This is the moment where viewers can register their concerns about how restrictions on recording, streaming in the home, and traveling with content could affect them. Anyone interested in that process can find resources on how to file comments and understand the issues at stake.

There’s a flag down on this play, and it’s worth taking a closer look at what these campaigns are really asking viewers to support.

Time to File! The FCC’s Next ATSC 3.0 Comment Period has Begun

admin — Sun, 23 Nov 2025 12:42:19 +0000

This week, the FCC’s recent ruling became official as it’s now published in the Federal Register. This means that the 60 day comment period begins today.

As I note in in my latest video, there isn’t as much for the public to respond to as there was before. The broadcasters, however, have a lot to answer in regards to how they’ve been handling the DRM situation. More on that here.

Tyler the Antennaman and I are recommending that if you decide to submit written testimony on the docket to include photos of yourself along with the encryption messages you’re receiving when trying to tune DRM protected content. This can come from either your HDHomerun device or some of the other ATSC 3.0 tuners that require an Internet connection. You can see an example based on my filing here. Here’s the photo that I embedded.

One thing I noticed is that the FCC accepts Powerpoint files on the docket that are under 100MB in size. You could embed videos in a Powerpoint presentation in addition to photos.

Before you file, be sure to check out the Antennaman’s latest video about sticking to the facts and submitting information that can be of use to the commission. In my video, I have a step-by-step guide for filing documents on the FCC docket.

You can find the FCC’s electronic filing system here.

More to come. I’ll be monitoring the docket and will let you know when we need to respond to falsehoods.

Cracks in the Over the Air TV DRM Cartel?

admin — Wed, 19 Nov 2025 12:15:17 +0000

I’ve been following the fight over the encryption of broadcast television for a while now, and the past couple of weeks have revealed some meaningful shifts in how parts of the industry are talking about it. What began as an effort by the largest broadcasters to impose full encryption on their signals—making it harder for people to watch and record over-the-air television the way they do now—has moved into a phase where even some of the people who helped build the system are beginning to question whether it’s the right path forward.

You can learn more in my latest ATSC 3.0 update.

The FCC’s pending public comment period is still waiting on publication in the Federal Register, but in the meantime I’ve been watching the trade press. One notable development is SiliconDust becoming an official ATSC 3.0 certificate authority. This isn’t a replacement for A3SA’s DRM system, but it does give broadcasters an alternative for the broadcast identification certificates that 3.0 will eventually require. It’s another sign of how fragmented and privatized the standard has become—functions that once sat squarely with the FCC now depend on private bodies asserting control, and smaller stations are looking for options that don’t leave them answerable to a handful of major corporations.

Then there’s the more direct crack in the wall: an op-ed from Fred Baumgartner, a former Sinclair executive who helped lead their NextGen TV implementation. He’s now arguing that encryption should be paused. He describes the rollout as abrupt, poorly communicated, and alienating to early adopters—many of whom discovered their new TVs and receivers couldn’t display encrypted 3.0 broadcasts at all. He also points out that encryption shifts broadcasting away from what it has been for decades, turning it into something closer to narrowcasting. Coming from someone who helped architect the system, it’s a notable departure.

Sinclair’s current leadership didn’t let that stand unanswered. Sinclair VP Mark Aitken responded in a follow-up piece, insisting that encryption doesn’t hinder access when “properly implemented,” a phrase that glosses over the very real fact that devices already in people’s homes cannot tune these encrypted broadcasts. Aitken also frames “free unencumbered access” as applying only to a single primary channel—essentially signaling that everything else could move behind a paywall. It’s hard to see how that squares with why people use antennas in the first place, especially those who cut the cord to avoid paying retransmission fees.

Baumgartner doubled down in a second response, saying he has tried and failed to articulate a scenario where the benefits of encryption outweighed the downsides. He also warned that the approach invites regulation, a point the FCC itself has raised as it asks broadcasters to justify why encrypted over-the-air signals are appropriate in a system designed to serve the public. That debate will continue once the comment window opens, but it’s already clear that consensus is faltering inside the industry itself.

As for what happens next, I’m planning to submit my own filing once the comment period officially begins, including photos of the devices in my home that can no longer tune freely available broadcast channels because of encryption. Many people submit only text, but showing the real-world impact could help contextualize what’s happening. These public airwaves belong to everyone, and documentation from the people affected is part of what keeps the process grounded.

There’s still a long way to go, but seeing industry veterans rethink their stance—and watching the FCC press for answers we’ve been asking for—feels like a shift. It’s not final, and it’s not enough on its own, but it’s movement.

I’ll keep an eye on the Federal Register and on the broadcasters who seem to be discovering that the path they set may not be as defensible as they once thought.

The FCC Vote on ATSC 3.0 Opens a New Comment Period on DRM, Tuner Mandates

admin — Tue, 11 Nov 2025 11:59:01 +0000

For the past couple of years, viewers like us have been urging the FCC to rein in broadcasters who want to lock down free antenna signals with encryption. These broadcasters would prefer you watch through paid services that generate retransmission fees, but many of us have been pushing back to preserve the ability to view and record free local TV as we always have.

In my latest video, I talk about a recent vote the FCC took on moving to the next step of the process which includes a significant focus on DRM.

Back in August, Tyler the Antenna Man and I visited the FCC to deliver those concerns in person. A few weeks ago, the commission released a draft order that reflected much of what we presented. The document included serious questions for the industry about how they’ve been handling DRM under ATSC 3.0 and whether their current encryption practices even comply with the Communications Act. The FCC also asked whether regulation of DRM should fall under their authority rather than a private group like A3SA as it does now, and if privacy protections and fair-use rights need to be written into formal rules rather than left to voluntary standards.

Two commissioners, Republican Olivia Trusty and Democrat Anna Gomez, acknowledged the discontent members of the general public are feeling about the ATSC 3.0 transition and committed to ensuring the public interest is a priority in future decision making.

The commissioners voted unanimously to move the process forward. While no new rules are in place yet, the order proposes ending the simulcast requirement that forces stations to broadcast in both ATSC 1.0 and 3.0, and it opens another round of public comment. Once it’s published in the Federal Register, there will be 60 days to file comments and another 30 for replies. That’s our opportunity to make sure the record reflects real-world experience—what it’s actually like trying to tune encrypted 3.0 channels when current devices can’t play them back.

I plan to continue submitting evidence that counters misleading claims from the broadcast lobby. For example, a Sinclair executive recently asserted on LinkedIn that ATSC 3.0 works on phones, tablets, and gateway devices. It doesn’t. I tested every configuration he mentioned—USB-C tuners, set-top boxes, network gateways—and none could decrypt the DRM-protected broadcasts. SiliconDust’s HDHomeRun, which he cited as compatible, has been locked out entirely from A3SA’s system. The president of Silicondust even appealed directly to the FCC for relief. When industry talking points like that appear, I post photographic proof of what consumers actually encounter: a black screen where free TV used to be.

One other example occurred on the official docket. In a filing, broadcasters reversed their position on tuner mandates. Just a few years ago they told the FCC to stay out of hardware requirements. Now they’re asking for mandatory ATSC 3.0 tuners, even though DRM complexity has made manufacturing affordable devices nearly impossible.

As the next comment window opens, I’ll share updates through an email list at lon.tv/rapidresponse and a set of instructions at lon.tv/fccinstructions for anyone who wants to participate. This FCC seems more receptive to the public than prior FCC’s, but the chairman is moving quickly, so timing will matter. When broadcasters spread misinformation, the best response is data—photos, test results, and honest firsthand accounts. That’s how we keep the record straight and make sure free, open access to local TV doesn’t quietly disappear behind a paywall.

The Gen 2 ADTH Nextgen TV Receiver is Still a Mess..

admin — Sun, 26 Oct 2025 10:55:12 +0000

I picked up the second-generation ADTH ATSC 3.0 NextGen TV tuner on Amazon the other day (compensated affiliate link) to see how it performs. If you’re not familiar with it, the device lets you receive both traditional ATSC 1.0 and new NextGen TV broadcasts, including those that use DRM encryption. It can record encrypted broadcasts to an SD card, though playback only works on the box itself. ADTH also claims that a “gateway” firmware update will allow more flexibility later.

See it in action in my latest review.

What caught my attention was the box’s promise of “unconnected DRM,” suggesting it wouldn’t need an internet connection to tune in live television. The first-generation model required one, which made no sense for free over-the-air TV. So I decided to test that claim directly—no Wi-Fi, no Ethernet, just power and an antenna.

Out of the box, the tuner booted up and I was able to bypass the WiFi setup. I manually set the time and region since there was no internet connection to do it automatically. That step alone might frustrate less technical users. The channel scan found about 56 stations, and I was able to tune both encrypted and unencrypted channels without connecting online. My local encrypted CBS and NBC affiliates came through fine, confirming that offline decryption now works.

Unfortunately, HDR output was dim on my non-HDR display. There’s no option to disable HDR in the settings—just “always” or “adaptive”—and color-space adjustments made no difference. That means the firmware still forces HDR on displays that can’t handle it.

Recording worked in a limited way. I could start a recording to the SD card and even switch channels on the same broadcast frequency, but the box only supports a single tuner. Once a recording finished, I couldn’t find where it went. The “library” section that should have contained my recordings was missing until I connected to the internet and performed several beta firmware updates. ADTH is advertising DVR functionality and offline use simultaneously, but in practice, the DVR only becomes usable after downloading updates and enabling a beta mode.

After a few updates, the library finally appeared and playback worked, including for encrypted channels. It did play back those encrypted recordings when I disconnected it from the Internet. However, the software remains buggy—the interface froze at one point, requiring a power-cycle. The tuner also runs an old version of Android 11 with a 2021 security patch, making it dangerously out of date.

So, while the device technically works without the internet for basic live TV—including DRM channels—most of its useful features require network access. The HDR bug, outdated software, and rough interface make it feel unfinished. It still costs $100, far more than the $20 tuners available for ATSC 1.0, largely because of the licensing fees and development costs tied to encrypted broadcasts.

This is one of the few options that can handle NextGen TV’s DRM, but it’s hard to imagine a casual viewer getting this up and running smoothly. I’ll keep testing it as updates roll out, but this second-generation box feels like another rough draft in the long transition to ATSC 3.0.

The FCC Listened to You — NextGenTV DRM Is In the Hot Seat

admin — Thu, 09 Oct 2025 11:34:41 +0000

The FCC has taken an important step in its ongoing review of the ATSC 3.0 television standard, and this time, encryption—or DRM—has taken center stage. After months of advocacy, travel to Washington, and countless public comments, the agency has released a draft of proposed rulemaking that directly addresses many of the issues consumers have been raising.

In my latest video, we dive into the FCC’s proposal and talk about next steps.

The most immediate change in the document would eliminate the ATSC 1.0 simulcast requirement. Broadcasters using the new ATSC 3.0 system have been required to continue broadcasting the same programming on the older ATSC 1.0 standard to ensure that no viewers lose access. If this rule change is approved, stations could transition to the new format without maintaining a 1.0 signal, effectively speeding up the shift to next-generation TV. The FCC is also considering allowing MPEG-4 encoding on 1.0 channels to make more efficient use of spectrum, something that could benefit both broadcasters and viewers with modern televisions.

But the biggest topic is DRM and how it’s currently being managed. The FCC is asking for public comment on whether the commission should establish rules governing encryption of free, over-the-air broadcasts rather than leaving control to the A3SA, the private industry group currently setting those standards. The Commission expressed concern about how that system operates and whether it aligns with the Communications Act of 1934’s definition of broadcasting. They’re also examining whether DRM is creating unfair competition or restricting which devices can receive signals—an issue that has limited tuner availability and compatibility with platforms like Roku and Apple devices.

The filing also shows that consumer feedback has made an impact. Thousands of viewer comments have been cited throughout the document, and both Tyler the Antenna Man and I were mentioned multiple times. The FCC clearly took note of the frustration from early adopters who bought new tuners only to find themselves locked out by encryption controlled by a private organization. The agency even raised questions about fair use and whether DRM could undermine consumers’ rights to make in-home recordings—something the broadcast flag controversy of the ATSC 1.0 era had already tested in court two decades ago.

As the FCC prepares to vote on these proposals at the end of the month, it’s clear they’re not ready to sign off on encryption as it currently exists. The upcoming vote will likely remove the simulcasting rule, open another round of public comments, and extend the process into next year. That gives consumers and advocates another opportunity to weigh in. My hope is that the Commission will consider a real-world test by suspending DRM to see how the market responds. If encryption has been holding back tuner adoption and consumer interest, that experiment could prove it.

So we will likely need to keep submitting comments and addressing the questions the FCC is asking that relate to our own personal experiences. Tyler the Antennaman and I also suggest attaching selfies of “encryption error” screens that block free TV could help put faces to the issue. The FCC’s draft shows that public voices are being heard, and continuing to speak up might be what ensures free, open access to the airwaves remains part of the country’s broadcasting future.

ATSC 3.0 Update: Broadcasters Contradict Themselves in Recent Filing

admin — Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:29:43 +0000

The nation’s largest broadcasters are continuing to push an over the air encryption plan that will make it harder for people to record content or use gateway devices to watch TV around the house. What has been a free and open system is moving toward a locked-down approach unless the FCC steps in.

As it becomes clearer that encryption—and the market gatekeeping it enables—are holding back both tuning device availability and adoption, broadcasters are now demanding a government mandate to push it all through. But just a short time ago they were advocating for government to stay out of the process.

In my latest video, I take a look at how broadcasters are contradicting themselves in a recent FCC filing.

After Tyler the Antenna Man and I met with the FCC, the nation’s largest broadcasters quickly followed with their own meeting and filed an ex parte letter about it. In the letter, the broadcasters say:

“We emphasized that all parts of the broadcast ecosystem – from CE manufacturers to developers of converter boxes to retailers and smaller market broadcasters – are waiting for a signal from the FCC that there is a plan to bring the transition to ATSC 3.0 to an end.”

In a response, the Consumer Technology Association reminded the FCC in a meeting and a follow-up ex-parte filing that all parties to the transition, including the broadcasters, never wanted the government stepping in on the transition as it was supposed to be a voluntary, market-driven one. But the CTA stopped short of saying what is obvious—that DRM has been the real barrier to adoption.

But the CTA was joined by Public Knowledge in their meeting with the FCC, and that organization very strongly pointed out the pitfalls in allowing a select group of broadcasters to essentially regulate consumer electronic devices.

Check out my interview with Public Knowledge’s lead attorney here.

Looking back at their own public statements shows how much the broadcasters have shifted in their position. In 2019 Pearl TV, the organization comprised of the large broadcast owners, was promising great new technology and choice for consumers under this voluntary transition strategy. In 2021 they touted gateway devices like the HDHomeRun, even though they later denied that device certification. By mid 2023 they were boasting about adoption and asking a rhetorical question “where’s the problem?” in regards to tuner adoption. They urged the FCC to stay out of the market, but now they want a mandate to force adoption.

They even contradicted statements they made just a few weeks ago. In their letter they state:

“We discussed A3SA’s uniform set of policies that applies equally and objectively to all manufacturers of a particular device type. Finally, we explained that A3SA does not certify hardware components or chips within devices.”

Yet in July, these very same lawyers told the FCC that the HDHomeRun was being blocked because of its chips. They CC’d the industry press and just about every relevant department with it too.

Conversations I’ve had with broadcast executives suggest they don’t really understand the technology they’re trying to bolt onto broadcasting. Encryption designed for the web doesn’t translate cleanly to over-the-air TV. Yet they continue to dig in, convinced it’s necessary. Much of their industry today is built on retransmission fees rather than actual viewers, and DRM protects those business interests.

And this goes beyond just the encryption. Another feature, signal signing, gives this small group of large broadcasters the ability to take a channel off the air. Even stations that don’t want encryption still need to pay for a certificate from the major broadcasters just to appear on certified tuners. Engineers like Weigel’s Kyle Walker have raised these concerns, but the executives pushing this system seem more interested in invoking flawed analogies—like comparing broadcast encryption to SSL on websites—than in engaging with real technical risks. Here’s an example of that from a recent LinkedIn exchange from one of those executives:

The examples they cite don’t hold up. The 1987 Chicago “Max Headroom” hijacking and the more recent Russian satellite hijacks were both upstream feed compromises that encryption and signing would not have prevented. Yet they continue to argue that certificates protect against threats that have nothing to do with the broadcast signal itself.

For consumers, the result is fewer choices and fewer freedoms. Encryption blocks devices, limits how recordings can be made, and puts unnecessary restrictions on how people watch the signals they’re legally entitled to receive. The broadcasters are not tacitly acknowledging that this market has failed, but it’s their own system that created the failure.

If they really want adoption, there’s a simple solution: stop encrypting. Remove the DRM and devices will appear, consumers will buy them, and the market they keep talking about will actually materialize. Instead, they’re asking the FCC for a mandate to force this system into place. I think the better mandate would be the opposite—no encryption and no private regulation of public airwaves. That’s the kind of order I’d get behind.

No, the FCC Did Not End ATSC 1.0 Broadcasts Today

admin — Tue, 02 Sep 2025 18:30:15 +0000

The FCC’s Media Bureau put out a notice on September 2nd (DA 25-789) about the ongoing transition to ATSC 3.0, also known as NextGenTV. There really isn’t anything new in this order that wasn’t already in place from 2017 when ATSC 3.0 broadcasts first began.

One of the key points is around the requirement that full-power and Class A stations continue to provide their main channel in the current ATSC 1.0 format if they switch their primary signal over to ATSC 3.0. This is meant to protect viewers who don’t yet have compatible equipment.

The rules allow an application to be processed on an expedited basis if a station keeps at least 95 percent of its existing audience covered with an ATSC 1.0 simulcast. What the Bureau clarified is that it will continue to use detailed terrain-based coverage analysis to determine whether that 95 percent threshold is met.

For stations that can’t quite hit that 95 percent mark, the notice emphasizes that their applications won’t be ignored. The Bureau says it will still review them on a case-by-case basis, weighing factors such as whether viewers in the “loss area” are still served by another station carrying the same network, or whether the station offers mitigation like providing converter boxes.

The Bureau also highlighted some of the flexibility already built into the rules. Stations are only required to simulcast their main channel in ATSC 1.0, not additional sub-channels. The “substantially similar” programming requirement applies only to that main stream, which gives broadcasters room to experiment with new ATSC 3.0 features such as interactive services or higher-resolution video. Stations can also partner with more than one host station to meet the 95 percent coverage goal. Low-power and translator stations aren’t required to simulcast at all, though they can volunteer to host other stations’ signals.

It’s important to note that this notice doesn’t create new obligations or change the simulcast rules. Instead, it’s meant to give broadcasters more certainty about how the FCC staff will interpret and process applications. In other words, this is more about guidance and reassurance than a firm new policy.

Look for a draft order that will more specifically spell out the rules for the cutover – including whether or not DRM will be allowed. Stay tuned!

ATSC 3 Update – “High Noon” : A secret broadcaster plan to take over the public airwaves

admin — Tue, 02 Sep 2025 11:40:46 +0000

I’ve been following the ongoing debate over the encryption of over-the-air television signals for several years now. While most of that coverage has focused on the consumer experience, there’s also some pain in store for smaller independent broadcasters through the “High Noon” effort being imposed by the nation’s largest conglomerates.

I dive into that in my latest analysis piece.

“High Noon” is not some conspiracy theory – it’s the actual name for a plan about to be implemented by the nation’s largest broadcasters that mandates every station to purchase an encryption certificate through a private security authority called the A3SA. That authority, of course, is owned and operated by the nation’s largest broadcasters and has the power to revoke these certificates at will – essentially being able to pull those smaller stations off the air even if they have a valid FCC license.

These certificates are a requirement of the ATSC 3.0 standard even if the station doesn’t broadcast a DRM encrypted signal. And if that’s not all bad enough, the rules of how all of this work are locked behind an NDA so nobody can talk about it. And of course this private authority can change the rules anytime they want.

And how can they pull a station off the air? Well, the few tuners on the market that support DRM have to also support this signature authority. If the tuner doesn’t detect the certificate it won’t show the station to the viewer citing security issues.

The backdrop here is a filing from Weigel Broadcasting, one of the larger independent broadcasters with stations nationwide and a digital over the air network reaching most U.S. households. Unlike the big conglomerates, Weigel relies on actual viewers tuning in for ad revenue, so they’ve resisted DRM from the start. They’ve also been vocal in their opposition on the FCC docket, pointing out that DRM-compliant tuners are significantly more expensive than current ATSC 1.0 gear.

In tests, Weigel engineers confirmed that TVs are denied access to a channel when presented with unsigned signals, putting the A3SA effectively in the role of gatekeeper instead of the FCC.

“High Noon” was supposed to roll out on June 30, but broadcasters delayed its implementation in March. The reasons aren’t public, and under the NDA, people in the know can’t say why. I think pressure from independent stations and public opposition may be playing a role. Still, once that “High Noon” switch is flipped, broadcasters could find themselves in a position where their ability to reach viewers depends less on FCC licensing and more on private agreements with a handful of corporations.

The justification offered is security—protection against hijacking and what their industry association says are “deepfakes” of a broadcast. But history shows these incidents are exceptionally rare. The only real example of a hijack was the Max Headroom incident in Chicago in 1987, when someone overpowered a microwave relay and briefly took over a broadcast. More recent disruptions have been the result of poor security practices, like leaving default passwords on emergency alert systems or mistakes made inside the broadcast center by technicians. Encryption and signing certificates wouldn’t have prevented those.

Meanwhile, the consumer side of ATSC 3.0 remains sluggish. DRM has made tuners more expensive, stunting adoption of what otherwise could be a much more consumer-friendly standard. Independent broadcasters argue that the only way forward is to drop DRM entirely and allow viewers to access the public airwaves without interference which would bring down the cost of tuning devices substantially.

That’s where things stand now. The “High Noon” switch hasn’t been thrown yet, but the threat of it looms over the industry. For me, the question is whether the FCC will continue letting private groups usurp their authority, or if it will step in before viewers lose access to something they’ve always been entitled to receive.

Tyler the Antennaman and I Met With the FCC

admin — Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:22:47 +0000

Tyler the AntennaMan and I recently traveled to Washington, D.C. to meet with the FCC’s media bureau about the push to encrypt over-the-air television. In my latest video I run through the slide deck I presented to the FCC, and Tyler did the same with his presentation on his channel.

Broadcasters are hoping to make it harder for viewers to watch without paying subscription fees, and we wanted to make sure the concerns many of you raised were heard directly by the Commission. We paid our own way for travel, hotel, and meals, despite accusations from one broadcaster that Tyler was somehow on the take. The reality is that we were supported only by our viewers, who are equally frustrated by the ATSC 3.0 DRM roll-out.

The FCC doesn’t hold big public hearings for these kinds of decisions. Instead, they rely on docket filings and meetings with stakeholders. That’s why this visit mattered. The bureau staff listened closely, asked thoughtful questions, and took notes. It was clear they are trying to get a full picture before advising the commissioners, who will eventually make the decision about when ATSC 1.0 will be sunset and the ATSC 3.0 era beings.

My portion of the presentation centered on why DRM is the main obstacle to consumer adoption of ATSC 3.0. The technology has been on the air in many major markets for years, but tuners remain scarce and expensive. In contrast, ATSC 1.0 tuners are inexpensive, often around $20, and easy to build because compliance is limited to FCC standards. ATSC 3.0 requires not only FCC compliance but also certifications from NextGenTV and approval from the A3SA, with costs so high that small businesses are effectively shut out.

This leads to situations where a basic ATSC 3.0 tuner costs upwards of $90, compared to $22 for an ATSC 1.0 device with identical functionality (including DVR features). And even when people buy these devices, they often ship with outdated software—one box I tested was four years behind on its Android security updates. Meanwhile, only three operating systems currently support ATSC 3.0 DRM, leaving much of the market, including Roku’s large share, without access.

I also shared with the FCC what I found at Walmart and Best Buy. Walmart, which accounts for more than a third of U.S. TV sales, didn’t stock a single ATSC 3.0-capable television. Best Buy had a few, but only in the high-end section, and even then the support wasn’t advertised. Shoppers wouldn’t know about it unless they asked. On the other hand, antenna sales remain strong, with valuable retail space dedicated to them, and even ATSC 1.0 tuners were sold out on my last visit to Walmart.

Despite the challenges, many existing devices can handle unencrypted ATSC 3.0 signals, including older TVs, Roku models, Apple TV, Nvidia Shield, Xbox, iPhones, and iPads. I showed examples of all of these working fine with unencrypted broadcasts. Encryption is the barrier. Without it, adoption could grow quickly and cheaply, as inexpensive tuner boxes could be developed for broad compatibility. Instead, enthusiasts remain the only group experimenting with ATSC 3.0, mostly through devices like the HDHomeRun.

Broadcasters want to mandate the inclusion of expensive tuners in new TVs, but I argued that the real fix is simpler: drop DRM. Years have already been lost to this failed experiment, and open signals would encourage innovation and adoption much more effectively. The FCC now has to weigh the evidence, and I expect strong pushback from broadcasters in their docket responses. Whatever happens next, the commissioners will need clear evidence before making their decision, and I believe we’ve shown that DRM is the central issue holding back this transition.

Tyler’s portion of the presentation is available on his channel, and I’ll continue watching the docket for developments. The debate over the future of free, over-the-air television is far from over.

HDHomerun Makers Meet With the FCC Regarding ATSC 3.0 Encryption

admin — Thu, 07 Aug 2025 12:58:36 +0000

Last week, SiliconDust, the makers of the HDHomeRun, met with the FCC to discuss ongoing concerns over the encryption of over-the-air broadcasts in the U.S. We know this meeting happened because FCC rules require a public filing summarizing the conversation—and that document reveals a lot. It offers new insight into the challenges SiliconDust has faced, including what appears to be selective regulation by the broadcast industry, and some possible paths forward.

I take a deep-dive into their filing in my latest video.

At the heart of this issue is the use of digital rights management, or DRM, to encrypt ATSC 3.0 signals—something that wasn’t present in the older ATSC 1.0 standard. SiliconDust argues that encrypting these broadcasts violates the spirit, if not the letter of the law in regards to public access to the airwaves. They also point out that the rules governing access to the encrypted content are deliberately opaque. Device makers like SiliconDust are under NDA and can’t publicly explain how the system works or how they comply with it. That kind of secrecy runs counter to how the FCC has typically operated—where rulemaking is transparent and compliance information is available to the public.

SiliconDust has gone through the expensive process of getting NextGen TV certification for their device. That’s one of two certifications needed to access encrypted signals. The other is DRM certification through A3SA, the private industry group managing the encryption scheme. They had initially pursued a different DRM method—DTCP—but the A3SA changed course, which forced SiliconDust to pivot midstream. This shifting landscape has created additional costs and delays, which helps explain why so few tuners for ATSC 3.0 are available and why they’re priced well above what consumers might expect.

Silicondust isn’t new to managing protected content. Years ago, they developed the HDHomeRun Prime, which worked with cable providers to decrypt scrambled digital signals. That product functioned reliably for years and helped many consumers avoid renting costly cable boxes. So, SiliconDust already has experience building secure systems that work within industry requirements.

They even tried to partner with LG to bring ATSC 3.0 access to older LG TVs via an app and an HDHomeRun device. This would have allowed millions of LG customers to access the new broadcast standard without upgrading their hardware. LG was a co-developer of the ATSC 3.0 spec, yet their joint proposal was rejected by the A3SA. That decision blocked a cost-effective solution that could have helped speed up adoption.

There are also examples of what appears to be selective treatment between SiliconDust and competitors. ZapperBox, another ATSC 3.0 tuner, has been promoted at trade shows and in press materials, despite lacking NextGenTV certification. SiliconDust, which has both DRM and NextGen certifications, has been left out.

SiliconDust isn’t just voicing complaints. They came to the FCC meeting with proposed solutions. The simplest, they say, is to eliminate DRM from public broadcasts altogether, which would remove the need for expensive certification and open up the market to more affordable devices. That certification process might explain why inexpensive TVs at retailers like Walmart don’t include ATSC 3.0 tuners—the added cost pushes them out of the low-margin price range.

Another option is to model DRM implementation after streaming services like Netflix, which encrypt streams using widely supported methods. But the current ATSC 3.0 DRM system goes further, layering additional restrictions on top of Google’s Widevine which is what the broadcasters chose for encryption.

But Widevine is only one of several DRM standards. Apple devices use FairPlay. Microsoft Xboxes and PCs use PlayReady. Netflix supports all three by tailoring the stream to the device.

Netflix can do this because they provide a unique stream to every viewer. Broadcasters, working with limited over the air bandwidth, do not have the flexibility to deliver three separate streams of the same content.

Although A3SA had promised broad device compatibility over a year ago, but only Android devices, which are owned by Google and support Widevine natively, have proven to work. Apple, Roku, WebOS, and others remain unsupported. That’s a significant problem for a broadcast standard that’s supposed to be universally accessible.

Another issue is that the DRM standard is not actually part of the official ATSC 3.0 spec, nor is it regulated by the FCC. That means A3SA—a private organization with just five members—can change the rules at any time. They can add new restrictions or limit access based on brand. That kind of unchecked authority over access to public broadcasts raises valid concerns.

The FCC doesn’t hold public hearings on this issue. Instead, they’re conducting private meetings like this one to gather information. It was the National Association of Broadcasters that initiated this push for a hard transition from ATSC 1.0 to 3.0. But adoption has been slow, partly because DRM has made devices more expensive and difficult to develop. Over the coming weeks, more meetings and filings like this one will likely surface, possibly followed by a draft order outlining the FCC’s next steps.

Even though the public comment period has closed, it’s still possible to file additional thoughts with the FCC. Here’s a link with instructions where you can do that if you feel the need to respond to other filings. I’ll continue following the story and keeping you updated.

A Retail Field Test of ATSC 3.0 / Nextgen TV availability – Are they even trying?

admin — Thu, 31 Jul 2025 15:01:42 +0000

I’ve been covering cord cutting for a while now, and lately, over-the-air television has taken up a lot of my attention. It’s a solid, free alternative to cable, but there’s a shift happening in the broadcast world that’s causing some issues. The industry is transitioning from ATSC 1.0 to a new standard called ATSC 3.0, or NextGen TV. On the surface, this new standard looked like a real improvement, but the added layer of encryption broadcasters are implementing is making things more expensive, less convenient, and a lot more complicated.

Broadcasters have insisted that plenty of devices are available to tune in to these new signals, so I decided to test that claim myself. I went out shopping to see what’s really available, visiting Best Buy, Walmart, and Target to look for NextGen TV compatible products and the logo that Pearl TV, the industry’s marketing group, has been asking consumers to look.

You can see how it went in my latest video.

Pearl claims to have reached millions of households with their marketing campaign and sold millions of compatible devices. They also maintain a website listing all the NextGen-certified products.

My first stop was Walmart, the largest seller of TVs in the United States. The store had plenty of options from brands like Samsung, LG, Hisense, and TCL, but none supported ATSC 3.0 according to the NextGen TV website. This means most people buying a TV at Walmart today are getting one that can’t receive the new signals without a separate device.

Despite that, Walmart had a decent amount of shelf space devoted to over-the-air antennas. Shelf space in a store like Walmart isn’t assigned lightly, so those antennas must be selling. Interestingly, I did find the NextGen TV logo on some of those antennas, but again, not on any TVs themselves. And if you go to Walmart’s website, there’s no option to filter TVs by NextGen compatibility.

At Best Buy, there was a wider range of TVs, including some high-end models that do support ATSC 3.0. The salesperson I spoke with was knowledgeable and pointed me toward the higher-end Sony, LG, and Samsung models. But he wasn’t aware that LG had recently stopped including ATSC 3.0 tuners due to a patent issue. Even among the TVs that did support the standard, there was no visible NextGen branding or mention on in-store signage. I asked if customers often asked about the feature, and he said almost no one does. Most people are more concerned with whether their TVs support streaming apps. Best Buy also had a few antennas with the NextGen logo and some Tablo DVRs for sale, but those only work with the older ATSC 1.0 standard, since ATSC 3.0 gateway devices are effectively locked out right now.

Target had the smallest selection of TVs, mostly mid to low-end sets, none of which supported ATSC 3.0. They also had antennas for sale, with the NextGen logo prominently featured. But like the other stores, there was no way to filter for ATSC 3.0 on their website. Even Amazon, with all its filtering options—covering things like screen mirroring tech and USB-C ports—has no option to search for NextGen TVs. It was the same story on Samsung’s own website. The only retailer I found with a NextGen TV search filter was B&H Photo (compensated affiliate link), and the models listed were all priced over $1,000, since most ATSC 3.0 TVs are still in the premium category.

This whole experience shows that despite the claims being made, most consumers are not buying Nextgen-compatible TVs as most TVs don’t have the tuner. Even if someone wanted one, it’s hard to know which models support it in-store. There’s virtually no signage, no website filtering options, and minimal awareness from retail staff.

Pearl TV may tell the FCC otherwise, but it’s clear there’s still a long way to go. What’s especially frustrating is that without DRM, this new standard could have been something to get excited about. Instead, us tech reviewers have spent years focusing on the DRM problem rather than celebrating the benefits. The broadcasters chose this path, and now they’re claiming those of us who are raising concerns are just astroturfing the issue. There’s still time to fix things, but the window is closing.

Did TV Broadcasters Just Admit to Selectively Enforcing Their Own Encryption Rules?

admin — Tue, 22 Jul 2025 14:15:37 +0000

On Friday, television broadcast association Pearl TV filed a scathing letter to the FCC in response to the thousands of consumers who wrote in to the commission complaining that their home gateway products (like the HDHomerun Flex 4k) are unable to tune encrypted broadcasts. I was surprised to see Pearl TV, through their attorneys, essentially admit to selectively enforcing their DRM rules to favor one tuning device type and maker over another.

I break it down in my latest video.

A gateway device allows a single antenna connection for bringing digital TV signals into the home and available on the local Wi-Fi or ethernet network. Any device with a screen can watch the content, and most gateway devices also offer a centralized DVR for recordings. Essentially gateway users can watch TV by just pulling up an app on any device.

Gateways are popular among cord cutters because they replicate many of the features that come with expensive streaming and cable TV plans. But when consumers “cut the cord,” broadcasters lose cable & streaming retransmission fees that make up a sizable portion of their annual revenues.

Broadcasters, through their encryption organization called the A3SA, have not allowed any gateway device to work with their encrypted broadcasts, permitting only single television tuner boxes that require separate antenna connections for each screen they are attached to. These devices can record, but only onto the single device without centralized DVR features found in gateways.

Pearl TV’s filing is misleading the FCC in response to questions about why Pearl’s broadcast partners are locking out home gateway devices that consumers have enjoyed for nearly 20 years. In their ex-parte filing, Pearl asserts:

The root cause why the HDHomeRun device has encountered issues is that it depends on a chipset manufactured by HiSilicon, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., which the Commission has found to be “a national security threat to the integrity of our communications networks” given that the company has been deemed to be “highly susceptible to influence and coercion by the Chinese government.”

Pearl also references a Department of Commerce blacklist in a footnote:

Huawei also has been placed on the US Commerce Department’s “Entity List,” and thus American companies are prohibited from providing sensitive technology to it. 15 C.F.R. § 744, Supp. 4 (2025) (The BI Entity List, as defined in 15 C.F.R. § 744.16, contains the names of “foreign parties subject to specific license requirements for the export, reexport, or in-country transfer of controlled items.”

This filing suggests that any component from a blacklisted company violates the industry’s secret, non-disclosable rules concerning decryption. Their assertion is not even legally correct as a receive-only TV tuner is not a piece of telecommunications infrastructure that these laws and regulations apply to.

But even if those laws did apply, it’s clear the A3SA & Pearl are selectively enforcing this “rule.“

Let’s examine the GT Media X1, currently available on Amazon and other e-commerce sites for approximately $60. It is advertised as “DRM Certified.” My independent testing confirms its ability to play back and record encrypted content, a function exclusive to A3SA certified devices. It is capable of tuning into DRM protected content on a single television, but it is not a gateway device so it only works on a single television.

After removing the casing, I was greeted with the chip circled in red on the Chinese designed and manufactured X1’s motherboard. That chip is made by YMTC, which was added to the Commerce Department’s black list under the Biden administration in 2022.

According to the footnote in the Pearl TV filing, this should be an immediate disqualifier for A3SA certification. Yet, here we are with a device that is fully certified and capable of decrypting content.

This is a prime example of the anti-competitive nature of the opaque selective “regulation” that Pearl and broadcasters are imposing, where they get to decide who has access to the market. Here they continue to give an American company and television viewers the run-around while extending preferential treatment to a foreign entity – even allowing that company to break these opaque rules.

What’s worse, the GT Media box initially shipped to US consumers was running with an Android operating system that was four years out of date containing many known security vulnerabilities that puts consumers at risk and also makes the broadcaster’s encrypted recordings less secure. You can see for yourself in my review of the product.

If that wasn’t bad enough, the GT Media Device did not have the Google Play Store and required sideloading apps from unknown sources, which opens the door to additional vulnerabilities.

While GT Media says they have since rectified some of these security issues, the larger question is why was it approved in the first place? It clearly violates an alleged rule of using a blacklisted component AND has gaping security holes.

But it’s a tuner, not a gateway device. And the broadcast industry has been trying to find ways to kill off gateways once and for all.

All of this comes as a surprise to Silicondust CEO Nick Kelsey, who told me that the A3SA licensing authority never communicated this concern to him. In fact, the A3SA approved the HDHomerun for on-device decryption by issuing Widevine security credentials in 2022 per this email supplied to me by Kelsey. Widevine would only turn over ATSC 3.0 DRM credentials to applicants who were approved by the A3SA.

In 2023, Pearl’s partners granted full NextgenTV certification for the HDHomerun product and software knowing full well what was inside the unit.

So I asked the A3SA for comment. Specifically I wanted to know why they approved the GT Media Box, and to share any records of SiliconDust being notified about the component issue. Here’s what they said:

“Huawei has been on a restricted component list with the U.S. government for more than five years. SiliconDust cannot claim ignorance of U.S. law.. SiliconDust has long been aware of this concern – so it is not new information to them.”

I pressed for more than just this but this was all they were willing to give.

The HDHomerun product hasn’t changed since those certifications and it’s apparent Pearl and their partners clearly knew what components were inside the unit when granting them.

With this blatant example of cooking up rules to push out a technology they don’t like, another question is what are Pearl’s goals here? Is it to protect content or inconvenience consumers and limit their choices for tuning devices?

The market is speaking loudly that gateway devices are the preferred means of watching and recording live television. A quick search of Amazon for “TV tuners” reveals that customers are choosing gateway devices over standalone TV tuners by a large margin. Three of the top four best sellers when searching for “TV tuners” are Tablo ATSC 1.0 gateways.

A similar search for “ATSC 3.0 tuners” reveals that the HDHomerun Flex 4k product is the best selling ATSC 3.0 device.

This new FCC has consistently advocated for open markets, and allowing those markets to dictate the optimal path rather than regulations. I fully support this stance. However, Pearl’s letter clearly indicates their preference to artificially restrict consumer choice. They aim to stifle a thriving cottage industry of US-based gateway hardware and software manufacturers through a private regulatory regime that lacks fairness and transparency.

It’s time the commission regain control of this absurdity, assert that broadcasters do not have the power to regulate device manufacturers, and ban the use of encryption over the public airwaves. It will solve a multitude of problems this transition is facing and will result in a vibrant and competitive marketplace for consumers and broadcasters alike.

Here’s Why Your Cable or Streaming TV Bill is So Expensive..

admin — Wed, 25 Jun 2025 13:04:04 +0000

If you’ve ever looked at your cable or streaming TV bill and wondered why it keeps climbing, there’s a good chance it has something to do with retransmission consent disputes like the one playing out between Altafiber and Nexstar. This case gives us a rare look inside the kinds of negotiations that usually happen in private and might help explain some of the hidden costs passed along to subscribers.

I take a look at the complaint in my latest video.

Altafiber, formerly known as Cincinnati Bell, filed a complaint with the FCC accusing Nexstar of negotiating in bad faith. At the heart of the complaint is Nexstar’s demand that Altafiber carry its cable news network, NewsNation, as a condition for continuing to retransmit one of its local broadcast stations. Altafiber claims this violates FCC rules as they allege that Nexstar is not negotiating in good faith by forcing a cable channel to be bundled with a local broadcast station.

What’s more, Altafiber says that only about 900 of its 87,000 subscribers live in the market where Nexstar’s broadcast station is located. Yet they’re being asked to pay for NewsNation across their entire subscriber base. Altafiber says viewership of NewsNation is extremely low, adding that only about 30 people complained when NewsNation was dropped. They argue that the proposed increase in Newsnation’s renewal fee is 15 times the rate of inflation.

This situation is part of a larger trend. Broadcasters used to be guaranteed carriage on cable systems through must-carry rules, but those were ruled unconstitutional in the 1980s. The Cable Act of 1992 replaced that with a system where broadcasters can either demand free carriage or negotiate “retransmission consent” which requires cable operators to pay to carry the station. Most broadcasters chose the latter, and the result is a steady increase in retransmission fees as advertising revenues decline. In my area, Comcast’s local broadcast TV fee recently jumped from $32.75 to $37.50 per month at the start of 2025. And that’s on top of the regular monthly bill for cable and internet service.

This kind of cost creep was what finally pushed me to cut the cord. These fees tend to sit outside of long-term contracts, so they can be increased at any time. The added frustration is that you’re often paying for channels you don’t watch or want, but have no choice in the matter. Altafiber claims NewsNation is profitable not because of viewership, but because of these kinds of forced bundling tactics.

In 2023, Nexstar made $2.57 billion from retransmission fees—far outpacing their ad revenue. In 2024 that number rose to $2.9 billion. The business model seems less about attracting viewers and more about collecting fees from cable and streaming companies, who in turn collect them from you.

The National Association of Broadcasters is pushing for even more deregulation, including relaxed ownership rules and changes that would let them negotiate directly with streaming services like YouTube TV and Hulu in the same way they do with traditional cable companies. That means the $83 monthly bill you’re paying for streaming could go even higher if these efforts succeed.

Some people (like me) try to bypass all this nonsense with an antenna, but that’s becoming harder too. The new ATSC 3.0 broadcast standard is encrypted using DRM that relies on Google and Amazon infrastructure. To watch free over-the-air TV, you often need a “certified” Android box connected to the internet to download decryption keys. The whole system is positioned as protection from “big tech,” yet it can’t function without it.

It’s not often we get this level of detail into how the sausage is made. But based on how things are trending across the industry, the next price hike is probably already on its way.

DRM and Your Rights: Interview with John Bergmayer from Public Knowledge

admin — Thu, 12 Jun 2025 11:16:16 +0000

John Bergmayer, Legal Director at Public Knowledge, provided me some detailed insight into the ongoing FCC debate surrounding DRM (Digital Rights Management) and ATSC 3.0, also known as NextGen TV in a recent interview.

You can watch the full interview here.

Bergmayer’s organization, alongside the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Consumer Reports and other organizations, submitted a comprehensive FCC filing strongly opposing the DRM implementation proposal from the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB).

Public Knowledge, a Washington D.C.-based consumer rights advocacy group, champions balanced digital rights, net neutrality, intellectual property reform, and media policy reforms that benefit diversity of voices and consumer interests. Bergmayer, who has been with the organization for over 12 years, emphasized their proactive role: “We do interface with government directly and participate in regulatory proceedings like this one at the FCC.”

Despite engaging in working groups aimed at consensus-building for the future of television, Bergmayer identified substantial disagreements among stakeholders. He explained, “There was consensus on the sort of issues that don’t really matter all that much… but on fundamental questions about DRM and encryption issues, there was not a lot of agreement.” Bergmayer highlighted that within broadcaster groups, positions significantly diverged, citing smaller broadcasters like Weigel Broadcasting, who see limited benefits in transitioning to ATSC 3.0.

A central point of contention involves DRM implementation, which Bergmayer argued severely threatens fair use rights and consumer freedoms. He emphasized the inherent conflict: “DRM interferes with things that are legal… it prevents you from accessing the content to do things that are fair uses.” According to Bergmayer, DRM undermines established consumer rights, specifically referencing landmark fair use cases such as the Sony case, which secured the right to record and privately use broadcasted content at home.

Bergmayer pointed out the paradox created by DRM regulations, noting that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) makes circumventing DRM illegal, even if the underlying action, such as recording television programs for personal use, is legally protected fair use. He explained that this contradiction effectively criminalizing legitimate first amendment activities.

The chilling effect of DRM was another significant concern raised by Bergmayer. He indicated that DRM requirements could severely limit innovation and device availability. Specifically, he mentioned popular devices like the HDHomeRun, which significantly outsell DRM-compatible devices precisely because of their flexibility and consumer-friendly nature.

Bergmayer also underscored the unique obligations of broadcasters, emphasizing their responsibilities given their free access to valuable public spectrum. “Free public airwaves should not be turned into a private playground for these companies,” Bergmayer said.

Regarding consumer engagement, Bergmayer praised the active participation of thousands of individual commenters in the FCC docket, noting its unusual depth for such technical issues: “It’s really impressive that there’s people out there who are willing to spend the time to make their voice heard.”

Looking forward, Bergmayer predicted inevitable legal challenges regardless of the FCC’s decision, referencing previous influential cases like the Broadcast Flag litigation, which Public Knowledge successfully led. He believes further court battles are likely due to persistent conflicts between DRM implementation and established individual rights.

Bergmayer strongly encouraged continued public awareness and advocacy as the FCC is obligated to process and acknowledge consumer feedback in making its decisions.

I will have more on this topic as news develops!

Public Knowledge, The EFF, Consumer Reports and Other Organizations Oppose DRM in a New FCC Filing

admin — Sun, 08 Jun 2025 14:54:55 +0000

A major filing was submitted just before the ATSC 3.0 public comment deadline by a coalition including Public Knowledge, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Consumer Reports, and several other organizations. Their message to the FCC is clear: DRM has no place in public broadcast spectrum. You can read the document here and watch my analysis piece here.

Their argument centers around the idea that mandatory encryption under ATSC 3.0 fundamentally conflicts with the legal and constitutional frameworks that have long governed broadcast TV.

One case they point to is American Library Association v. FCC, where a rule that would have forced devices to honor a broadcast flag was overturned. The court concluded that the FCC had no authority to regulate what happens inside consumer devices once a signal is received. That precedent is particularly relevant as we now face a situation where encryption could prevent people from exercising their long-established right to record broadcasts.

The filing emphasizes that public spectrum isn’t a private asset—it’s a shared, collectively owned resource managed under a mandate to serve the public interest. That’s different from how spectrum is handled in industries like mobile phones, where companies purchase and control allocated spectrum. Here, broadcasters are allowed to profit, but only as trustees serving the public.

What stood out in this filing was how thoroughly it outlined the risks to consumers. Many certified ATSC 3.0 devices are already showing their flaws—most require Internet access to tune televisions, others are running outdated software, and few give users any meaningful flexibility. If encryption becomes the norm, gateway devices, DIY DVRs, open-source solutions, and even basic home recording could vanish.

A central point made by the filing is that DRM turns broadcasters into gatekeepers—not just over content, but also over the devices people can use. It also creates a strange contradiction in the law. On one hand, it’s legal to record a broadcast under the American Library decision and the 1980s Sony Betamax case; on the other, it’s illegal to bypass encryption under the DMCA. So even if you have the right to record something, you will be breaking the law in practice.

They also call out the ATSC 3.0 Security Authority, or A3SA, for setting private rules that aren’t subject to public oversight. Even the encoding guidelines broadcasters have touted are limited—they only apply to ATSC 1.0 simulcasts, not future ATSC 3.0-only broadcasts.

The process by which A3SA licenses devices is also under scrutiny. Developers have to sign NDAs, the terms aren’t transparent, and consumers have no voice in the process. This kind of structure, the filing argues, runs counter to the FCC’s mandate to ensure open and nondiscriminatory access to public airwaves.

Interestingly, the document even questions whether encrypted broadcasts still qualify as “broadcasting” under the law, since they require a privately licensed decoder to access them.

So what happens next? It’s going to be a waiting game. The FCC is about to be short on commissioners, with two stepping down and replacements not yet confirmed. Until the commission has a quorum, it won’t be able to vote on anything substantial—including ATSC 3.0 rules.

On Monday we’ll have an interview with John Bergmayer from Public Knowledge, the lead author of the filing, to dive into this topic further.

Until then, this conversation around DRM is going to slow down a bit as we wait for the FCC to get back to full strength. But I’ll keep tracking the story and will have more updates when the next phase begins.

Sinclair Broadcasting Says ATSC 3.0 / NextGen TV DRM Concerns are “Astroturf”

admin — Thu, 15 May 2025 14:21:29 +0000

I’ve been keeping a close eye on the ATSC 3.0 NextGen TV transition, and with the public comment period now closed, we’re into the reply phase. Many of you submitted comments sharing your experiences with DRM making it harder to watch local TV, and it was encouraging to see so many voices represented. Industry participation was a bit more muted—except for Sinclair Broadcasting. They were anything but quiet.

Sinclair, which owns numerous TV stations nationwide, filed a lengthy comment just before the deadline, and they went all in on DRM. While most other broadcasters and industry players sidestepped the issue, likely to keep the focus on finalizing the transition date, Sinclair declared in their filing that those of us concerned about DRM are manufacturing outrage. Specifically, they urged the FCC not to be “swayed by a paroxysm of astroturf concern generated by vloggers…hostile to the concept of intellectual property.”

I did into Sinclair’s filing and offer my comments on it in my latest ATSC 3 commentary video.

Sinclair also pinned the blame on TV and tuner manufacturers, claiming they created compliance problems. But if you look at the SiliconDust HDHomeRun, which remains the top-selling ATSC 3.0 tuner on Amazon (compensated affiliate link), that argument starts to fall apart. It’s fully certified, carries the NextGen TV logo, and paid to become an “adopter” of the A3SA DRM standard. Yet their product still can’t access encrypted broadcasts, likely because devices that act as gateways—letting viewers stream TV across multiple platforms—just aren’t what the industry wants in the DRM era.

Sinclair also argues that services like Netflix use DRM, so broadcasters should be able to as well. But Netflix supports multiple standards—PlayReady, Widevine, FairPlay—so it works on nearly any device. They’ve gone out of their way to make watching legally more convenient than pirating. In contrast, broadcasters have offered buggy, outdated Android boxes with questionable security and limited support. I’ve tested a few myself, like the Zinwell and GT Media boxes, and both shipped with Android TV builds that hadn’t received a security patch in four years.

Consumers have spoken with their wallets. The HDHomeRun ATSC 3 gateway tuner is the best selling ATSC 3 device on Amazon by a wide margin. The Zinwell tuner, which the industry seems to prefer, was once $99 and now costs $129. It barely moves off the shelves. There’s no mystery here—people want reliable, flexible options that respect how they’ve been watching TV for decades.

On the question of intellectual property, Sinclair’s record complicates their position. In one case, they were sued for taking a photographer’s images from Facebook and Instagram and using them for profit without permission. They tried to argue that the photographer shouldn’t have posted the photos if he didn’t want them reused—an argument a judge rejected. That’s a hard position to reconcile with a company now portraying itself as a defender of copyright.

There’s also precedent around fair use in the home. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of home recording in the 1984 Sony Betamax case, and the broadcast flag regulation was struck down in 2005 when the FCC overstepped its authority. Broadcasters are now leaning on the DMCA, which makes it illegal to bypass encryption, even for legal uses like time-shifting a recording. They’re hoping this legal path will succeed where the broadcast flag failed.

Sinclair’s regulatory history doesn’t help their case. They paid a $48 million civil penalty—the largest in FCC history—for failing to disclose facts during a proposed merger and for allegedly negotiating retransmission deals in bad faith. They were also accused of running undisclosed sponsored content. Yet they argue that others are the problem and that fewer regulations should apply to them while they enjoy all the benefits of broadcast distribution.

Near the end of their filing, Sinclair suggested broadcasters should only be required to offer one free over-the-air signal and be allowed to charge for everything else. That’s the real heart of the DRM debate. It’s not just about encryption—it’s about carving out a new subscription business model using public spectrum.

In all of their cries for deregulation, the only regulation they suggest keeping in place is one that doesn’t apply to them but to TV manufacturers. They offered no objection to the NAB’s controversial request that all TV makers switch to installing more expensive ATSC 3 tuners now ahead of the transition deadline.

There’s more to come. Several consumer advocacy groups recently filed a joint response to the FCC, and I’ll be digging into that next. I’m also drafting my own reply to Sinclair’s comments, which I’ll be sharing soon. If you’re still interested in weighing in, the reply phase is open, and you can respond to any comments on the docket.

Big ATSC 3 / NextGenTV Update: FCC Opens Public Comment Period, Acknowledges Thousands of Anti-DRM Complaints

admin — Tue, 15 Apr 2025 11:45:42 +0000

Over the past two years, I’ve been closely following developments around the transition to the new ATSC 3.0 television standard—particularly the implications of broadcasters encrypting over-the-air signals with digital rights management (DRM). In my area, I’ve already lost access to a couple of local networks via my HDHomeRun. That experience isn’t unique, and now the FCC is asking for public comment about how this transition should proceed.

I cover what they’re looking for and show how you can respond in my latest video. Instructions are also below.

This is the most direct invitation yet to share feedback on some key questions before any decisions are finalized. Notably, question eight on their list acknowledges thousands of consumer objections to DRM on ATSC 3.0 broadcasts—comments that many of you submitted over the last couple of years from our collective effort:

Even though the question seems to accept the idea that broadcasters may need to protect their content, there’s still room to advocate for alternatives. If you believe gateways could strike a balance between access and protection, you can say that. Personally, I don’t believe DRM is necessary at all, but the FCC appears to be open to constructive, well-supported suggestions. The key is offering real-world experiences and ideas, not just opinions.

We may still end up losing this fight, but I think it’s important that this question made it into the public notice. They did listen to us and they are interested in this topic enough to include it in the public notice. So now we have a chance to provide further clarity. So you can take the cynical route and do nothing, or spend a few minutes to share your thoughts with a commission that is at least interested in hearing from you on this topic.

Another point they’re seeking input on involves some of the mandates broadcasters are proposing as part of the transition—things like requiring all new TVs to include ATSC 3.0 tuners, putting broadcast TV front and center in menu interfaces, or even adding a dedicated broadcast button to remote controls.

What’s different this time is that the current FCC is moving faster than its predecessor. That means deadlines are tight. The main comment period ends May 7, 2025, with replies to comments due by June 6. If you submitted comments before this notice came out, please file again to have your input considered during this official period.

When writing your comments, be specific and back up your statements with facts whenever possible. If DRM has impacted your ability to enjoy over-the-air television—especially if you use HDHomeRun or hoped to—it’s important to say so. Also consider the broader impact. Small companies like SiliconDust, which produces HDHomeRun devices, face real risks. Channels DVR is in a tight spot, and Plex hasn’t even attempted to get into ATSC 3.0 because of the current restrictions. These are the kinds of real-world effects the FCC needs to hear about.

If you’re ready to comment, the process isn’t too difficult. On the FCC’s website, you’ll find two options: an “express comment” form and a more detailed “standard filing” route if you have something longer to say. Just make sure to reference docket number 16-142, and be sure to include your mailing address—it won’t be made public, but it’s required to verify your identity.

I’ve put together my own written comment organized into sections to make it easier for the FCC to follow that you can find here. PLEASE DO NOT SUBMIT MY WORDS AS YOUR OWN. A number of people have done this already, this hurts the cause more than helps. Take the time and relate your personal experinces.

atsc3comment Download

Once you’ve submitted your comment, it may take a day or two to show up in the public docket. But the important thing is to submit something. Your experiences matter, and the FCC is actually listening—at least for now. Whether they’ll take action based on what we say remains to be seen, but our collective efforts are part of the official record. That alone makes it worth speaking up.

Here’s how to submit:

1. Click this link to be taken to the FCC filing form. This will take you to the express filing. You’ll also see the option at the top of the screen to select the standard filing option where you can submit a PDF or Word Doc. The instructions for submitting are the same for both.

2. On the first line for proceedings type in 16-142 . The system will then display the text “Authorizing Permissive Use of the “Next Generation” Broadcasting Television Standard.” Click on that to lock in the docket number. Here’s what it looks like:

I’ve found that sometimes on the express form that the search doesn’t always pop up correctly. Sometimes clicking over to standard and back to express will get it working. Once you click on it 16-142 will light up yellow like this:

3. Fill in your information. A US address is required and note that this will be part of the public record.

4. Write your comment in the comment section. It’s important to provide some detail especially how this change will make it difficult for YOU to consume over the air television.

We’re almost there!

The ADTH USB Tuner Review: More DRM Nonsense and Poor Compatibility

admin — Fri, 11 Apr 2025 14:43:39 +0000

I’ve been recovering from laryngitis, but I’m back at it with a look at a new TV tuner from ADTH. This one comes with a lot of buzz from the broadcast industry, which is pitching it as a reliable solution for tuning encrypted ATSC 3.0 TV signals. After spending time with it, though, I found it falls painfully short of expectations. See more in my latest review.

The ADTH tuner will likely cost more than the device you’re plugging it into. It’s also imported from China, so there’s a chance future shipments might cost more due to tariffs. You can find it here on Amazon (compensated affiliate link).

It connects via USB to Android TV or Fire TV devices. Out of all the hardware I tested, the only one it fully worked with was the Onn 4K Pro box. Everything else—like the Nvidia Shield, Onn stick, and Fire TV Stick 4K Max—ran into trouble with encrypted channels. On the Shield, encrypted ATSC 3.0 channels froze after showing a single frame. The Fire TV Stick displayed an error saying DRM wasn’t supported. In each case, unencrypted channels were fine, but the whole point of this tuner is to handle encryption, and that’s where it stumbled. My friend Elias Saba of AFTVNews.com tested twenty supposedly compatible devices and found only two worked as advertised.

To make things more complicated, AC-4 audio compatibility on the host device is also required for ATSC 3 broadcasts. Unfortunately most devices don’t say whether they do. So users are left guessing.

Setting it up was relatively simple. The app is available on the Android and Fire TV app stores. After granting permission for USB access—something I had to do each time I launched the app—it walked me through a channel scan and a dongle firmware update. It found channels quickly and offered a decent guide, both a quick overlay and a more detailed grid. The app also lets you pause live TV and jump back to the live broadcast, but there’s no recording or rewinding.

One feature that stood out was the stats screen. It’s the most detailed I’ve seen for ATSC 3.0 tuning and could be useful for those trying to troubleshoot signal issues or understand what’s coming through the airwaves.

It’s worth noting that the app only works on Android TV and Fire TV but not phones or tablets. I checked some APK sites to see if there was an unofficial workaround for mobile, but couldn’t find anything that worked. It also will never work with PCs, or anything Apple- or Roku-based. That’s a big limitation for a device that’s supposed to represent the future of TV tuning.

All of this brings me to DRM and its cost. Right now, the ADTH tuner is one of the few options that’s officially sanctioned to handle encrypted ATSC 3.0. But the GT Media USB tuner we looked at last year, which doesn’t support encryption but works on a much wider range of Android devices—including mobile—sells for as little as $30 on AliExpress. It even has DVR support via an SD card. Despite being cheaper and more versatile, it’s being held back by the same DRM restrictions that limit broader innovation in the space.

As broadcasters continue to push the FCC to accelerate the ATSC 3.0 transition, we’re left with hardware that still doesn’t deliver on the promise. Two years into this DRM rollout, basic functionality still isn’t guaranteed. There’s more to come this week as the FCC opens public comments on the DRM issue, and I’ll be sharing how to get involved. For now, this is where things stand—and it’s not a great place to be.

See more ATSC 3.0 tuners here.

Disclosure: I paid for this device with my own funds.

ATSC 3.0 Update: The CTA Opposes Broadcasters’ Request for Tuner Mandate

admin — Tue, 25 Mar 2025 12:49:08 +0000

I’ve been following the rough rollout of ATSC 3.0—also known as NextGenTV—for a while now, and this week the transition hit another bump in the road. A dispute over tuner mandates has surfaced between two key players in the process: the Consumer Technology Association (CTA), which represents electronics manufacturers, and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), which represents TV broadcasters. I dive into this in my latest video.

The disagreement is notable because these two organizations have worked closely to get this new standard off the ground. Even the NextGenTV logo consumers see on compatible equipment is a registered trademark of the CTA, not the NAB.

Recently, the NAB asked the FCC to push the transition forward, proposing a 2028 cutoff for the current standard in major markets. That proposal included several desired mandates. One, which I mentioned previously, would require manufacturers to include ATSC 3.0 tuners in TVs well before that deadline. But there were a few other items tucked into the request. For instance, the NAB wants the FCC to require that remotes with buttons for services like Netflix also have buttons for broadcast TV. They also want broadcast content to be featured prominently in on-screen menus—right up there with paid placements from streaming platforms.

This is where the CTA pushed back. Gary Shapiro, CTA’s CEO, took to LinkedIn with a public response. He accused the NAB of trying to force an unpopular product on consumers and manufacturers. He noted that less than 10% of Americans rely on antennas for TV and argued that these mandates would increase costs for everyone, especially at a time when affordability is a concern.

The CTA also began lobbying FCC commissioners directly. They brought along cost comparisons, pointing out that TVs with ATSC 3.0 tuners are significantly more expensive. They argue that additional costs—like those tied to licensing and DRM requirements—are part of why manufacturers are reluctant to include these tuners in their products.

And that’s been a sticking point all along. The tuners are pricey. They’re expensive to make and expensive to buy, largely because of how difficult it is to meet all the DRM requirements that come with ATSC 3.0. These restrictions make it tough for smaller companies to enter the market, which in turn limits consumer choice.

A good example is something like the HDTV Mate, a sub $60 tuner that doesn’t meet the DRM standards. It’s more affordable than the few certified options, but because it doesn’t comply with the DRM, it’s not really part of the formal ecosystem. Without the DRM roadblock, I believe we’d already see a wider selection of tuners at better price points.

Broadcasters don’t seem likely to budge on DRM. The CTA seems less focused on that issue than on the broader economic impact of the mandates. Still, the lack of tuners—and the obstacles to building them—is at the heart of why this transition has been so slow.

Looking ahead, I don’t expect the FCC to go along with any of the mandates the NAB is pushing for. It’s hard to imagine this FCC chairman telling manufacturers how to design their remotes or menu layouts. But the broader transition to ATSC 3.0 is probably going to keep moving forward. If nothing changes, over-the-air TV might become even harder to access, which could lead to its gradual disappearance. That might suit some interests, especially if the valuable spectrum currently used by broadcasters gets reallocated or repurposed.

It didn’t have to go this way. With more affordable tuners and fewer restrictions, we might have had a more vibrant market by now—even if it was a small one. But instead, we’re left with a limited selection of costly devices and a standard that’s tough for both consumers and developers to embrace.

I’m not giving up on the DRM issue, and if you’re concerned too, there’s a way to weigh in. You can visit my instructions here to file a public comment with the FCC. I’ll be following this docket closely, and I expect more developments as the FCC begins formalizing its approval process for the transition. Public comment periods and even field hearings are likely on the horizon. I’ll keep watching.

See more in this saga in this playlist.

I filed a response to the NAB’s ATSC 3.0 transition request

admin — Sat, 01 Mar 2025 17:38:06 +0000

As I reported on the other day, the nation’s broadcasters are hoping the FCC will finally set a date to transition to the new ATSC 3.0 standard. This of course comes with restrictive DRM that makes it difficult for consumers to tune into over the air television the way they do today.

Here’s what I filed in response:

Dear FCC Commissioners,

It is clear from both the Future of Television report and the recent request for rulemaking from the NAB that the availability of ATSC 3.0 tuners is the major barrier to this transition. Broadcasters seem to believe that setting a firm transition date while simultaneously pulling most of their programming off ATSC 1.0 will magically create a market for tuning devices.

The real reason for this tuner availability problem is that broadcasters have implemented a broken DRM encryption standard that barely works—even for early adopters like me. Before this encryption experiment, it was possible to tune and decode ATSC 3.0 signals on a variety of hardware and operating systems.

With encryption, however, broadcasters now limit tuning boxes to pre-approved tuners running Google’s operating system and encryption technologies. The NAB’s claims that Google is destroying their industry ring hollow when they have essentially created a monopoly for Google in tuning over-the-air signals.

Currently, I have an HDHomeRun “gateway” tuner connected to a single antenna, which delivers ATSC 1.0 and unencrypted ATSC 3.0 content to all of my televisions, computers, and other devices on my home network—regardless of manufacturer. DRM, however, will require consumers to make individual antenna connections to each television and purchase a Google-powered standalone tuner. How is this progress?

Broadcasters will argue that their streaming competitors also use DRM. This is true. However, those streaming services ensure that their apps are available across multiple platforms. Even Apple—well known for its closed ecosystem—makes its Apple TV+ app available on nearly all streaming devices.

A look at Amazon sales data for “ATSC 3.0 tuners” shows that consumers are choosing gateway products at a rate of 20 to 1 over standalone tuners. Why? Because purchasing a single device that integrates with their existing TVs and set top boxes just makes sense. Yet broadcasters want to restrict this option, forcing consumers to either buy more hardware or push them back into a subscription service where they can collect retransmission fees.

While broadcasters have assured this commission that their self-imposed “broadcast encoding rules” allow for in-home recording and gateway use, what they didn’t disclose is that these encoding rules—created entirely by them—only apply to ATSC 3.0 broadcasts that are simulcast on ATSC 1.0.

The broadcast industry’s reliance on retransmission fees will ultimately bankrupt them, as this business model defies basic economic principles. As demand for their product declines, they continue to raise prices. Comcast was charging me $36 per month in pass-through retransmission fees right before I cut the cord!

You will hear from many major corporations in the coming weeks, but I believe it is equally important to listen to the thousands of consumers who have filed on this docket. The truth is that DRM is harmful. The tuning solutions that broadcasters have approved are subpar, expensive, and have stifled innovation—preventing more tuners from reaching consumers by now. ATSC 3.0 offers significant improvements in signal quality that we should all be able to benefit from. But allowing broadcasters to encrypt their signals—on our publicly owned airwaves—in an effort to keep consumers locked into predatory retransmission fees is not the right path for this transition.

Broadcasters already have the full weight and power of the U.S. government to combat and prevent signal piracy. DRM does nothing to prevent piracy but significantly restricts law-abiding consumers from accessing the airwaves that we have granted broadcasters to use for free.

If they want a set transmission date, give it to them—with the requirement that these signals be delivered to the public without encryption or restriction, just as they are now.

For more, you see my prior reports here. You can add your voice to this effort by filing with the FCC yourself! Instructions are here.

Broadcasters Ask the FCC for a 2028 ATSC 3.0 / NextGenTV Transition Date

admin — Fri, 28 Feb 2025 15:06:26 +0000

The nation’s broadcasters are making a push for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to lock in a firm February, 2028 date for the transition to the NextGen TV standard, ATSC 3.0.

I take a look at their filing in my latest video.

The broadcaster proposal includes setting the February, 2028 date for the top 55 television markets to fully switch over, with smaller markets following by February 2030. Along with that date request, they’re asking the FCC to make a number of policy changes to accelerate the transition.

One ask is for the FCC to lift the simulcasting rules that exist under the current ATSC 3.0 rule. Right now, stations are required to offer “substantially similar” broadcasts in both the current ATSC 1.0 and newer ATSC 3.0 formats. Broadcasters want to move their higher value programming to ATSC 3.0 to push more viewers to upgrade their televisions or tuners.

Last month’s long awaited “Future of Television” report indicated significant adoption issues centered around ATSC 3.0 tuner availability. At the moment only higher end TV sets have the new tuners built in and standalone tuners are expensive. and lousy. Broadcasters are asking the FCC to mandate the inclusion of ATSC 3.0 tuners on all new televisions as soon as possible to get more of them out to consumers.

One hurdle to this request is an ongoing legal dispute over patents related to the ATSC 3.0 tuning technology. A company has already won a lawsuit against LG, requiring the manufacturer to pay excessive licensing fees on every television sold with an ATSC 3.0 tuner. The case is currently before an appeals court but will no doubt make a mandate difficult to put in place right now.

Another contentious issue is digital rights management (DRM) encryption that broadcasters are building into the new standard. Broadcasters acknowledge the concerns raised by consumers, but tell the FCC that their existing “encoding rules” allow unlimited recording and storage of TV broadcasts. They fail to mention that these rules only apply to simulcasts of ATSC 1.0 content, not dedicated ATSC 3.0 broadcasts. If simulcasting is phased out, broadcasters would have more control over how content is recorded and accessed. And on top of that there are significant compatibility issues that limit how consumers can access the broadcasts and record them.

Currently, the only tuners capable of decrypting these broadcasts rely on Google’s Android TV operating system and Google’s DRM technology. This means broadcasters, who argue they need regulatory relief to compete with Big Tech, are indirectly reliant on Google’s ecosystem to distribute their content. Additionally, consumers have expressed a strong preference for networked tuner solutions—such as gateway devices that connect to a home network—yet broadcasters have struggled to deliver on their promise to support them.

Cable providers are likely to push back against this transition timeline, due to the costs involved in upgrading their infrastructure to support ATSC 3.0’s DRM along with its new video and audio codecs. Broadcasters argue that setting firm deadlines will give cable companies enough time to prepare and budget but they make no offer to assist cable providers’ transition expenses.

Alongside this requested transition, broadcasters are also asking for policy changes that could impact local station ownership rules and streaming services like YouTube TV.

They asked the FCC to lift restrictions on station ownership, claiming they need the ability to scale up their businesses in order to compete for advertising revenue. Unlike digital platforms that can expand without regulatory barriers, broadcasters face limitations on how many TV and radio stations they can own, both nationally and within local markets.

Another significant request involves treating streaming services that carry local stations — such as YouTube TV and Hulu — the same as cable providers when it comes to retransmission negotiations. Currently, national networks negotiate these deals for streaming platforms on behalf of their locally owned affiliates, whereas cable companies must negotiate with each individual station. If the rule changes, it could drive up the cost of streaming services as local broadcasters gain leverage to negotiate their own carriage fees.

The broadcast industry’s current business model defies basic economic principles: they continually raise prices even as demand for their product declines, while simultaneously making it more difficult for cord-cutters to tune in over the air due to the industry’s insistence on broadcast DRM. This FCC chair has already indicated that there are better uses for TV spectrum, so I predict he will approve broadcasters’ request just to hasten their demise.

ATSC 3 / NextGenTV Interactive Features Broke my ADTH Tuner

admin — Sat, 01 Feb 2025 20:15:42 +0000

My ATSC 3 / NextGen TV woes continue.. My CBS affiliate, along with my local NBC station, have enabled interactive content, offering options like on-demand news segments, weather updates, and even the ability to restart live broadcasts. While the potential of this technology is promising, my experience with it has been far from seamless. You can see it in action in my latest video.

For this test, I used the ADTH box, currently the least expensive ATSC 3.0 tuner on the market. This is one of the devices that the broadcast industry is touting as an acceptable device to help people transition to the new standard on a budget.

The interactive features themselves are designed to provide a more dynamic viewing experience. When the prompt appears on a support channel, selecting the interactive option opens a menu where viewers can choose from various content categories. This might include local news updates, weather reports, emergency alerts, and special event coverage. For instance, NBC’s interface included information about the Paris Olympics, although that content was outdated. These features require an internet connection, as they pull in real-time updates from online sources rather than relying solely on the broadcast signal.

However, on my ADTH box, the interactive pop-up became a persistent annoyance. It pops up and stays persistent for a long time on a supported channels. And in the case of my NBC affiliate the interactive prompt prevented me from navigating back to the channel guide without switching to another channel first.

A particularly strange problem emerged when watching unencrypted ATSC 3.0 channels. A persistent large grey play button overlay appeared on these channels, blocking a significant portion of the screen. Oddly enough, this issue did not occur on encrypted channels. The play button glitch is not intentional, but it underscores the broader problem with the current implementation of ATSC 3.0’s encryption system. Broadcasters are misleading the FCC and the public by claiming these cheap boxes are ready for a major broadcast TV transition.

To troubleshoot, I updated the firmware, even trying a beta version. I performed a factory reset, plugged the box directly into my television to rule out HDCP issues, and tried multiple setups. Nothing fixed these problems. The ADTH box, which should be an accessible entry point for consumers into ATSC 3.0, instead became an example of the complications that DRM and unfinished software introduce to the experience.

Despite these issues, I do see value in the interactive features themselves. On-demand access to local news and alerts could be useful, and the ability to restart live broadcasts is a welcome addition. However, the current execution—at least on this hardware—is deeply flawed. The performance lags, interface issues, and DRM restrictions hinder what could be a major advancement in over-the-air television.

Beyond the interface frustrations, there were issues with HDR implementation. My NBC affiliate broadcasts in HDR, but the ADTH box doesn’t seem to tone map correctly, resulting in an overly dark picture. Switching between channels was also sluggish, and once interactive features were engaged, performance slowed down significantly. The delay in accessing menus and content made navigation frustrating, even when just trying to check the weather or local news updates.

With ATSC 3.0’s continued rollout, broadcasters and hardware manufacturers need to ensure that these features work as intended across a variety of devices. If the most affordable tuner on the market struggles this much, it’s hard to see widespread consumer adoption happening smoothly. For now, I’ll keep testing and see if future updates bring any improvements.

Is ATSC 3.0 NextgenTV Stuck?

admin — Tue, 28 Jan 2025 14:45:30 +0000

A long-awaited report on the transition to ATSC 3.0, the new over-the-air television technology, was released last week. The report represents the work of a broad coalition of stakeholders, including broadcasters, cable and satellite companies, consumer groups, and manufacturers, alongside the FCC. We talk about the report in my latest video.

What’s clear in the report is that the transition to this new over the air television technology is stuck – largely hindered by new DRM requirements that make it difficult for manufacturers to make affordable devices. Many are opting not to make one at all.

The FCC had initially targeted 2027 for turning off ATSC 1.0 and transitioning fully to ATSC 3.0. However, no stakeholder in the report supports setting a transition date yet. Consumer adoption of ATSC 3.0 capable televisions and tuners remains slow due to expensive devices. Most of the TVs that include ATSC 3.0 tuners are higher end sets, and while some lower-cost models are starting to include them, the technology has yet to reach the broader market. Similarly, cable and satellite providers face costly upgrades to their infrastructure and set-top boxes to handle the new standard, adding another layer of complexity.

Interestingly, the FCC chairman has suggested that TV spectrum could be repurposed for broadband data delivery, especially in underserved areas. Broadcasters are exploring this possibility by looking at how ATSC 3.0 might serve as a wireless data delivery system. However, this shift could force the industry to accelerate the transition or risk losing valuable spectrum to broadband use.

Retransmission fees—a major revenue source for broadcasters—complicate the situation further. Cable and satellite providers already pass significant costs to customers to cover these fees. Adding the expense of transitioning to ATSC 3.0 only intensifies the pressure cable companies face being stuck in the middle of broadcasters and customers. Moreover, legal requirements to maintain signal quality without material degradation present additional technical and financial challenges.

DRM is another contentious issue. Broadcasters continue to push for encryption of over-the-air signals, arguing it aligns with how the internet secures content. But unlike platforms like Netflix, which offer seamless access across devices even with DRM, ATSC 3.0 encryption has created significant consumer inconvenience. Currently, only devices running Android or Samsung’s Tizen TV OS can decrypt ATSC 3.0 signals, severely limiting accessibility.

Allowing gateway devices, like the HDHomerun and Zapperbox’s gateway functionality, could make the transition easier for consumers as they could watch ATSC 3 signals on the smart TVs and streaming boxes they already own. But the promised specifications from the broadcast standards body have yet to materialize.

I was very disappointed to see that the thousands of consumers who have spoken out against DRM on the FCC docket were not represented in this report.

For now, the ATSC 3.0 transition seems to be at a crossroads. With no clear path forward, the technology risks stalling altogether. Broadcasters, policymakers, and other stakeholders will need to address the existing challenges—from cost and DRM to consumer convenience—if they want to see widespread adoption.

Cord Cutting: Free TV with Gateway Devices Like the HDHomerun and Tablo

admin — Wed, 11 Dec 2024 14:03:17 +0000

Gateway devices like the HDHomeRun and Tablo (compensated affiliate links) take over the air television signals from an antenna, put them on your local network, and let you stream live television like any other app to just about any device. They even have DVR features for recording, too.

Beyond the cool factor these devices can also save you a lot of money in cable and streaming fees. My latest explainer video takes a hands-on look at these devices.

The HDHomeRun Flex 4K, for instance, allows users to watch or record up to four different channels simultaneously. This functionality—combined with the flexibility to use the device with various apps and platforms—offers a significant alternative to traditional cable services. Costs associated with these devices are often minimal compared to the steep and frequently rising fees for local TV broadcasts through cable and streaming providers. In my area, these fees can amount to nearly $400 annually, while a gateway device offers a much faster return on investment.

Setting up OTA television does come with a few challenges, particularly with antenna installation. Tools like the RabbitEars website can help identify the best placement and type of antenna for a given location. For those less inclined to set up an antenna themselves, services like Antenna Man offer personalized recommendations. Depending on geography, solutions range from small indoor antennas to larger outdoor ones, as seen with setups in rural or distant areas.

Despite these benefits, the freedom that gateway devices provide faces a looming threat. Broadcasters are pushing for DRM encryption in conjunction with the rollout of the ATSC 3.0 “NextGen TV” standard by 2027. If implemented, this could limit the current flexibility of accessing and recording OTA content, nudging consumers back toward paid subscriptions. Advocacy efforts have focused on challenging this encryption, with significant public input on the FCC transition docket urging for continued device usability.

The transition to ATSC 3.0 is not without its advantages. The new standard promises improved video quality and modern encoding capabilities compared to the decades-old ATSC 1.0. However, compatibility with ATSC 3.0 is a critical factor for prospective device buyers. For example, while the HDHomeRun Flex 4K supports both standards, many devices, such as the current generation of the Tablo DVR, are limited to ATSC 1.0 and may become obsolete post-transition in 2027.

Manufacturers are working on solutions to maintain the functionality of gateway devices under the new standard, but ultimately the broadcasters will have to allow it.

You can find individual reviews of these products here. You can also see my full coverage of the fight to prevent DRM encryption of the public airwaves here.

Disclosure: Silicon Dust, the makers of the HDHomerun, provided the Flex 4k device to the channel free of charge. No other compensation was received for this video nor did anyone review or approve this content before it was uploaded.

What’s Next for ATSC 3.0 DRM?

admin — Wed, 13 Nov 2024 18:07:31 +0000

As the rollout of ATSC 3.0 continues in the U.S., one major roadblock keeps surfacing: broadcasters’ push to encrypt over-the-air TV signals. This effort has made it more challenging for viewers to access free, over-the-air content and slowed adoption of the new standard by TV and tuner box manufacturers.

Now that the 2024 presidential election is behind us, I take a look at what might happen next in my latest video.

The recent election results are likely going to keep the government out of how broadcasters choose to implement the standard.

During a recent investor call, Nexstar, a prominent broadcaster, expressed optimism about potential regulatory changes under the current administration, particularly around loosening media ownership restrictions.

The FCC currently limits the number of TV stations a single broadcaster can own nationally, as well as the amount of broadcast space in local markets. Broadcasters argue that while they face restrictions, tech giants like Google enjoy open access to screens across the country. Ironically, these same broadcasters rely on Google’s encryption technology to encrypt their signals, making Google both a competitor and a provider. Additionally the only compatible tuner boxes are ones that are running Google’s operating system.

Current FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr, considered the front runner to be the next FCC chair, favors market-driven approaches over governmental mandates. He cites the success of the United States’ 5G rollout and sees the government’s role in ensuring scarce radio spectrum meets its highest and best use in a competitive marketplace.

In his past remarks, Carr has emphasized the importance of letting the market dictate the success of ATSC 3.0, particularly viewing it as an opportunity for “Broadcast Internet” – a high-speed data service for rural areas that could transform TV broadcasters into ISPs. This perspective could ultimately steer the industry toward data services over traditional TV broadcasts, especially in underserved regions.

Given these past statements it’s safe to assume he’ll give the industry discretion to finalize the standard themselves including the encryption component. If the market doesn’t respond well to that, so be it.

And the market may already be responding: ATSC 3.0 adoption is still lagging due to the complexities DRM brings to the mix. Few TVs currently support 3.0, and most that do are higher-end models. DRM certification complicates the production of ATSC 3.0-compatible devices, a situation that has hindered innovation from startups that could otherwise provide affordable options for tuning into these signals.

With the government expecting a transition in 2027, and Carr eying the existing ATSC 1.0 spectrum for 5G data providers, it’s possible market forces and a lack of regulatory pressure may cause broadcasters to pivot their entire business model.

Viewers interested in voicing their opinions on the matter still have the option to submit comments to the FCC. It might be worth reminding the FCC that DRM encryption is limiting the market for a competitive hardware tuning market.

ATSC 3.0 Encryption Limits Consumer Choice

admin — Wed, 23 Oct 2024 15:18:34 +0000

We are now about a year and a half in on the encryption of the ATSC 3.0 broadcast television standard. It’s becoming clear now how DRM is significantly limiting consumer choice and adoption of the new format. In my latest video I’ll demo how well an unencrypted channel works across a number of platforms that are currently restricted from viewing encrypted content.

This video was inspired by a recent press release pushed out by broadcast TV association Pearl TV touting a new USB dongle from ADTH that can tune into ATSC 3.0 content. They cite this as a step towards speeding up adoption of the new standard. BUT – the dongle will require an Internet connection to tune into protected channels.

What’s frustrating is that a similar device has been around for nearly a year, made by a company called GT Media. In fact I reviewed it when it came out. It’s a $60 USB stick that can pick up unencrypted ATSC 3.0 and 1.0 signals and an example of how robust the ATSC 3.0 tuner marketplace could have been by now.

What is clear is that we’d have many more affordable options like this one if broadcasters didn’t choose to encrypt and lock down their signals. I’m very interested to see what the ADTH dongle will cost vs. the GTMedia device given what the added expense of meeting those DRM requirements requires.

To show how frustrating this can be, I’ve got an HDHomeRun Flex 4K plugged into my antenna upstairs, and I can tune in non-encrypted ATSC 3.0 signals across multiple platforms: my Windows PC, iPhone, Roku TV, and even my Apple TV. Basically anything in my home with a screen can tune in. It all works perfectly without having to jump through hoops. But as soon as encryption gets involved, most of these options vanish, leaving me with only a few Android-based tuners to choose from that have to be directly connected to a television.

Earlier this year, broadcasters promised that we’d see more device compatibility beyond Android platforms, but here we are months later and we’re still waiting. Devices like Apple TV, Windows PCs, and others are still locked out because the encryption standard the broadcasters chose is a Google-based system.

It’s a real shame because ATSC 3.0 is such a leap forward in terms of video quality and efficiency. When it’s not locked down, it’s a game changer. I’ve been able to receive channels in my area that I never could before, but now two of my local networks have encrypted their signals, locking me out.

There’s still time to make our voices heard. The FCC is accepting comments on this, and it’s one of the most commented issues on their docket right now. If you feel the same way I do about the impact of encryption on the future of over-the-air TV, you can add your thoughts to the official file. I have instructions here on how to submit a comment to the FCC here on my site.

For now, I’m keeping an eye on how this develops, but it’s frustrating to think about how much potential this technology has and how much it’s being restricted by unnecessary barriers. If the encryption stays, I fear this could be the future of broadcast television—locked down and limiting what consumers can do with their own devices.

ATSC 3.0 Update: Did Broadcasters Mislead the FCC on LG Patent Suit Impact?

admin — Tue, 10 Sep 2024 12:54:49 +0000

I’ve been closely following the transition of over-the-air television in the U.S. to the new ATSC 3.0 standard, also known as NextGenTV. Initially, the process appeared smooth, but things started to take a turn. Broadcasters began encrypting channels, making them inaccessible to viewers. Then, the industry was hit with a significant lawsuit that forced LG, one of the largest TV manufacturers, to pull its ATSC 3.0 tuners off the market.

In my latest video, we take a look at how the industry is responding to this lawsuit one year out. Broadcast industry association Pearl TV told the FCC last year that this lawsuit had no impact on the transition to ATSC 3.0, but they told a very different story to an appeals court hearing the case last week.

That lawsuit, filed by Constellation Designs, didn’t seek an astronomical sum—only $1.6 million in damages. But the real issue was the future costs: LG would have to pay a $6.75 royalty per unit for every television equipped with the tuner. This rate was about six times what they were paying to the patent pool for other related patents. LG, understandably, decided to exit the market rather than absorb those costs.

Fast forward to the present, and the broadcasters’ association, Pearl TV, has filed a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals. They argue that the lawsuit could jeopardize the transition to ATSC 3.0. Their concern is that other patent holders, seeing the success of Constellation Designs, might also opt out of the patent pool, potentially leading to more lawsuits and higher costs for manufacturers. If that happens, they fear other TV manufacturers might follow LG’s lead and exit the market as well.

What’s interesting, though, is that Pearl TV’s message to the FCC last year was quite different. After the lawsuit, they downplayed the issue, saying everything was fine and there was no need for the FCC to intervene. They argued that the patent pools were functioning well and that there was no sign of market failure.

Despite Pearl’s reassurance to the FCC, the market tells a different story. Only a handful of new televisions this year included ATSC 3.0 tuners, and most are found only in high-end televisions that aren’t affordable for everyone. Panasonic’s recent announcement of their return to the U.S. market with TVs featuring ATSC 3.0 tuners adds some hope. However, those tuners won’t be activated until a future firmware update, and there’s no clear timeline for when that will happen.

The broader issue here seems to be that broadcasters are attempting to turn this new standard into a proprietary one. With ATSC 1.0, if a manufacturer’s product meets the FCC’s standards, they can build a tuner and sell it on the market. But under ATSC 3.0, manufacturers must get approval from broadcasters, pay for testing and certifications, and potentially face high royalty fees from DRM, which could make it financially unfeasible for many small hardware and software companies to participate.

The result is that consumers may end up paying more for television access, and options will remain limited – especially as the DRM encryption prevents the use of gateway devices that allow in-home streaming to televisions not connected to an antenna. This is particularly concerning given that broadcasters use public airwaves for free.

I’ve been encouraging viewers to make their voices heard with the FCC regarding these issues. Many have already submitted filings, and the ATSC 3.0 proceeding is now one of the FCC’s top concerns. It’s clear that public dissatisfaction with the transition is growing.

With a U.S. election coming up, followed by a presidential transition, this is a pivotal moment to influence how the FCC approaches the ATSC 3.0 standard. There’s an opportunity to ensure that the new standard benefits consumers, not just broadcasters. The more public feedback that can be submitted now, the better the chances of ensuring a fair and accessible transition.

ATSC 3 Update: Broadcasters say we are the “Super, super, super sub minority”

admin — Wed, 07 Aug 2024 13:27:50 +0000

I’ve been receiving numerous inquiries about new developments with the NextGenTV ATSC 3.0 over the air television standard. Unfortunately, there isn’t much news to report beyond some markets experimenting with streaming Internet-based channels that initiate their connections based on a URL passed over the air. You can see which markets support this new feature over at Rabbitears.info.

The other bit of news is that the industry refuses to budge on their desire to encrypt the public airwaves and make it more difficult for consumers to watch television in their own homes. In a recent interview, an industry spokesperson said those opposed to encryption are a “super, super, super sub minority” of the overall population. I disagree, and my latest video looks at why more people care than the industry’s tunnel vision suggests.

The interview was conducted by Dylan Ross of WNY Over The Air with David Arland of Arland Communications, who represents several industry players in the ATSC 3.0 rollout including the A3SA, the group responsible for the encryption.

Arland touched on gateway devices like the HDHomerun that bring a TV signal into one device and distribute over a local network to other devices. Arland said in the interview that gateway devices that support ATSC 3 encryption are coming, a claim that has been made since stations started locking their signals down a year ago. To date none of the certified ATSC 3 tuners allow gateway functions.

While the industry maintains this use case is minimal, a quick search of Amazon for “tv tuners” reveals that four of the top five best selling tuner products are in fact gateway devices: a few different SKUs of the 4th generation Tablo and the HDHomerun Flex 4k.

Arland also said claims that I and others have made that encryption is a tactic to steer consumers to subscription services is “bogus.” But if encryption is allowed by the FCC, that will be the only way for consumers to consume local tv stations in more than one room off of a single connection.

Despite the industry’s stance, consumer demand for flexible viewing options persists. Companies providing gateway hardware and software solutions for ATSC 1.0 continue to thrive, suggesting a substantial market interest. The future of DRM encryption will likely be decided by the FCC or Congress, influenced by the upcoming election and subsequent appointments to the FCC.

If you care about this issue, I encourage you to file a comment with the FCC. There are already over thousands of filings from other concerned viewers. The ongoing debate over DRM encryption is crucial, and your voice can make a difference.

ATSC 3.0 Emergency Alerts Stalled?

admin — Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:56:18 +0000

AWARN, an organization dedicated to standardizing television emergency alerts, has been instrumental in developing parts of the ATSC 3.0 standard. Their goal is to ensure that emergency alerts are consistent nationwide, allowing people to receive critical information in times of crisis. Improved emergency alerts has been one of the key selling points the industry is making in favor of adoption.

Like everything related to the ATSC 3.0 rollout, not much progress has been made in actually getting these these alerts to work. While the industry worked quickly to encrypt their signals to protect revenues, everything else appears to be falling by the wayside. This is the subject of my latest video.

John Lawson, AWARN’s executive director, told me that both broadcasters and the FCC need to provide some leadership to get this superior alert technology ready for the transition:

“Several major broadcast companies highlighted advanced alerting as the key benefit of NextGen TV when they filed comments requesting that the Commission approve voluntary transmission in ATSC 3.0. Chairman Pai thanked me personally for the role of AWARN in getting him to three votes for approval. But Sinclair and Capitol Broadcasting are really the only two broadcast companies making investments in advanced alerting since then. This inertia is exacerbated by a lack of leadership on the issue from the FCC.”
-Statement from John Lawson

Currently, emergency alerts are not being transmitted via ATSC 3.0 in most if not all markets, as demoed by WNY Weather on YouTube. This could pose a significant risk during emergencies when cellular networks are often the first to fail.

In a recent FCC Filing, AWARN showed examples of widespread cell tower outages during hurricanes in Florida and Louisiana but very few TV stations getting knocked off the air.

ATSC 3.0 promises enhanced alert features like geo-targeting to prevent “over alerting,” rich media content, device wakeup capabilities and more, which are crucial for effective emergency communication. These features can provide detailed information, such as evacuation routes and shelter locations, directly to affected individuals. Despite this potential, the lack of a standardized approach means these capabilities remain underutilized.

AWARN’s presentation to the FCC included practical suggestions, such as the use of battery-powered receivers for low-income households that might not have access to other forms of media. These receivers could ensure that everyone receives emergency alerts, regardless of their financial situation. They also pointed out that current set-top boxes like the ADTH and Zinwell devices could support these alerts, though no broadcasters are transmitting them yet.

The promise of ATSC 3.0 in improving emergency alerts remains unfulfilled due to a combination of industry priorities and a lack of interest by regulators for any part of the ATSC 3.0 rollout. The technology is available, but without a coordinated effort, its life-saving potential will not be realized.

ATSC 3 Update – The Arduous Zinwell Box Update Process

admin — Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:19:03 +0000

Navigating the arduous update process of the Zinwell ATSC 3.0 tuner shows just how much complexity ATSC 3 DRM’s requirements have brought to free over the air television. I run through the update in my latest video.

As I referenced in my initial review, the update process is anything but simple. The instruction to press a specific settings key, when the remote itself houses two, sets the stage for a complex journey. The update requires navigating deep inside the otherwise hidden Android interface to initiate a sideloading of the updater app followed by the update itself.

This complexity is magnified when considering their target market are users who are not technologically savvy. This also further erodes the marketing promise that this device does not require an Internet connection to operate. Unfortunately frequent changes to the ATSC 3.0 DRM will require frequent firmware updates to keep the television channels working.

Despite the complexity, the update introduced some notable improvements, such as an up-to-date Android security patch level and a new signal strength indicator. However, these improvements are somewhat overshadowed by the convoluted process required to install them.

The introduction of a slightly simplified update process through its TV tuner app marks a step in the right direction, albeit a small one. The tuner app will drop users off on the same updater apps they currently have to load manually. It does not appear future updates will happen automatically and it’s not clear what the update process will look like in the future.

The complexity and frequent updates required by devices like the Zinwell ATSC 3.0 Box just to maintain compatibility with unnecessary encryption serve as a reminder of the challenges that consumers will face when it comes to tuning free TV in the near future.

If you haven’t already, please reach out to the FCC and register your complaint. They seem very eager to extend their regulatory powers to the Internet, but are showing less of a desire to exercise their existing regulatory authority of the public airwaves.

Free Broadcast TV Streaming Service LocalTV+ Launches in Boston

admin — Tue, 05 Mar 2024 12:21:18 +0000

LocalTV+, a non-profit streaming service, has made its debut in Boston, offering those within a 100 mile radius of the city the ability to stream free broadcast television on their Apple devices. LocalTV+ works off the same legal theory as Locast, a previously shut-down service, by aiming to avoid repeating Locast’s mistakes.

In my latest video, I look at some of the headwinds LocalTV+ faces as it begins to build out its user base.

I am situated just beyond the 100-mile radius required to access LocalTV+ personally. After I published the video I was able to access the service by changing the location settings on my iPhone to provide a less precise address to the app. The video quality looks good and things spin up quickly.

Local TV+ is exclusive to iOS devices – iPhones, iPads, and Apple TVs. This choice is because the developer’s expertise with iOS and helps in more accurately determining user locations, crucial for adherence to federal law.

LocalTV+ operates through an antenna situated in Brookline and possibly other locations around Boston. The service captures the ATSC 1.0 signal, redirecting it to users through a Boston-based data center. It does not have DVR capabilities although I was able to pause and restart live TV on-device.

The service’s legal foundation is built on its non-profit status, established under the name Mass Local TV Inc. This positioning is essential for compliance with federal retransmission laws, as it seeks to avoid the pitfalls encountered by previous ventures such as Aereo and Locast.

Aereo launched a commercial service (also in the Boston area) which allowed users to “rent” a tiny antenna at their facilities to pick up over the air broadcasts. The broadcasters argued that Aereo was no different than a cable provider and was violating copyright by streaming their broadcasts. The US Supreme Court agreed with the broadcasters, arguing that there was an insufficient distinction between its offerings and those of a traditional cable service.

Locast took a different approach, setting itself up as a non-profit and depending on a provision in US law that allows non-profit organizations to retransmit television broadcasts. But these non-profits have to it “without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage, and without charge to the recipients of the secondary transmission other than assessments necessary to defray the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining and operating the secondary transmission service.”

Locast asked users to make a “donation” to the service that was around $5 per month. It was possible to access Locast for free, but free users would be nagged constantly with notices asking them to donate in order to watch without interruptions. Locast used the proceeds of user donations to expand the service into other TV markets and grew to over 2.5 million users.

The broadcasters took Locast to court on the grounds that the law does not allow donations to fuel expansion. The judge agreed with the broadcasters and also agreed to make Locast’s founder, David Goodfriend, personally liable for copyright infringement. Locast quickly shut down after that. In a settlement the broadcasters collected the leftover funds and decided not to pursue additional damages from Goodfriend.

For LocalTV+ to succeed where others failed, a delicate balance must be maintained. Its operations need to not step over the line to what federal law defines a cable system to be. This includes avoiding a paid donation subscription model and ensuring that any expansion is not funded by viewer donations.

Looming over this entire scenario is the ATSC 3.0 NextGen TV standard, which is on track to encrypt over-the-air signals. Such a development, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, would make it illegal for non-profits like LocalTV+ to retransmit encrypted signals, potentially rendering this and similar efforts futile.

Enjoy it while you can!

New DVR / Gateway Rules Announced for ATSC 3.0

admin — Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:53:00 +0000

On Monday, the A3SA announced new DRM rules for the emerging ATSC 3.0 TV standard. While the announcement on the surface looked encouraging, digging deeper reveals that these rules will not solve the issues the broadcast industry created by encrypting over the air signals. You can see an analysis in my latest video.

For the uninitiated, ATSC 3.0 is a new over the air TV standard that will soon replace the current ATSC 1.0 broadcast technology. Broadcasters added a digital rights management (DRM) feature into the new standard in an effort to prevent third parties from re-transmitting these signals over the Internet.

While it likely won’t stop piracy what it has been doing so far is preventing legitimate antenna television watchers from viewing the ATSC 3 signals – especially those of us who use a gateway device like the HDhomerun or Tablo. These devices allow a single antenna connection to bring over the air television to just about any device in the home with a screen. Encrypted channels don’t work with these gateway devices at the moment.

The A3SA’s press release, while not revealing the entire standard due to its proprietary nature, hints at significant changes that will restore network DVR functionality and will allow for in-home streaming from a gateway device to a software or hardware based video player like a phone, tablet, set top box and smart TV.

A3SA also says that the addition to the standard will also follow the “broadcast encoder rules” which allow for the freedoms we currently enjoy with over-the-air content, like recording, skipping ads, and no retention limits.

But there’s a catch .. the broadcast encoder rules are rules established by the industry, not the FCC or Congress. Additionally broadcasters are only required to abide by these rules so long as the encrypted ATSC 3.0 channel is simulcast with the older ATSC 1.0 version. After that they could do a rug pull and severely limit what TV viewers can do in the home with their recordings.

Device compatibility is another pressing issue. The announcement mentions support for platforms like Android, Fire TV, Roku, webOS, and Tizen but leaves out significant players like Windows and Mac PCs and gaming consoles like the Xbox and Playstation. And their support for Apple devices is, in their words, “in process” and not yet finalized.

As I have been detailing over the last several months the broadcast industry’s desire to encrypt all of their signals risks ruining the future of over the air television. DRM has added nothing of value to consumers and has only made the process of watching TV unnecessarily complex.

We need to keep the pressure on. Please be sure to contact the FCC and make your voice heard!

Working Around ATSC 3.0 DRM with the Channels App’s Custom Channel Feature

admin — Wed, 28 Feb 2024 02:59:36 +0000

I recently explored a unique solution for encrypted ATSC 3 TV stations with a special feature of the Channels App that allow for creating custom channels. You can see how I set it up in this video!

The Channels App consists of a DVR server running locally on a device like a NAS, Raspberry Pi, or PC and client apps that run on Apple TV, iOS, Fire TV and Android. The server application conencts to an HDHomerun and TV Anywhere sources for recording and streaming to client devices. You can learn more about Channels in this playlist. (Disclosure, Channels is an occasional sponsor on the channel)

One unique aspect of Channels is its ability to add custom channels through an M3U playlist. For example, one could use a hardware video encoder with an HDMI input and have that video sent into channels as a custom source.

However, Channels doesn’t run a listening server, meaning it needs to connect to an external source vs. having something sent to it via OBS. This led me to investigate an open-source Docker project called Restreamer, designed for video streaming but adaptable for integrating TV tuner video into Channels. Notably, all ATSC 3 tuners supporting DRM that I’ve seen do not encrypt the HDMI output. This allows consumers to legally record over-the-air television, as HDMI encryption has not been implemented by broadcasters and thus does not require the viewer to break encryption which is illegal under the DMCA.

My setup involved a Linux Mini PC connected to an HDMI capture dongle and the Zinwell TV tuner I recently reviewed. The installation of Docker and the Restreamer application was straightforward for anyone familiar with Docker. The setup on the Channels app involved adding a new source, configuring it with the right parameters, and mapping it to the actual guide data.

The custom channel I created was then fully integrated into my channel setup, behaving like any other channel despite its origin as an ATSC 3 DRM encrypted signal. It displayed correct guide data and allowed recording, just like other channels.

This proof of concept does show it’s possible to integrate DRM encrypted channels into an unrestricted home DVR. But of course this will only tune one channel at a time unless multiple tuners are connected to multiple capture cards.

Of course none of this is nonsense necessary with the current ATSC 1.0 broadcast standard that does not encrypt broadcast signals!

Another Zinwell Nextgen Tuner Owner Can’t Watch DRM Content..

admin — Wed, 21 Feb 2024 19:09:46 +0000

A viewer of my YouTube channel, Minimelkav, wrote in to say that he too is unable to tune ATSC 3.0 DRM protected channels without an Internet connection with the new Zinwell Nextgen TV Tuner. Check it out here.

An Update on my Zinwell ATSC 3 Nextgen Tuner Box Review

admin — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 14:38:09 +0000

My latest video is a follow-up of my initial review of the Zinwell Nextgen TV tv tuner box.

In my initial assessment I demonstrated that the device did not function as advertised, particularly in decrypting DRM-encrypted ATSC 3.0 stations in Connecticut without an internet connection. This was contrary to the device’s major selling point, which claimed no need for an internet connection for decryption.

Since publishing I received feedback from a viewer who was able to get his box to work with encrypted channels without ever connecting to the Internet. Additionally I heard from the Joe Bingochea, the President of Channel Master (the US distributor of the Zinwell box), who said they successfully tested the device in multiple markets prior to launch without first connecting the box to the Internet.

To ensure fairness, I revisited the issue, sharing my initial setup process and the difficulties I encountered. Following its initial channel scan, my Zinwell box tuned to WFSB here in Connecticut which is an encrypted channel. It displayed a blank screen. I then tuned to WTNH, an unencrypted ATSC 3.0 channel, which spun up quickly. Following that I tuned to another encrypted channel, WVIT, where I received an onscreen notification that I needed to connect to the Internet to watch.

Bingochea also addressed a discrepancy with the product’s quick start guide, which stated the need for an Internet connection. He admitted that this guide was outdated and not reflecting improvements made before the device’s launch. This situation highlighted the challenges and inconsistencies surrounding the DRM rollout in the broadcasting industry. It underscores the haphazard rollout of these “security features” which, in my opinion, seem to inconvenience consumers more than prevent unauthorized retransmission of broadcast signals.

Channel Master said they will be producing their own video demonstrating the device’s functionality, which I plan to share when available. This is fine I suppose, but my review documented a true consumer’s experience as I bought the product from their website and set it up like any normal consumer would.

I am sure we will be revisiting this topic soon as things develop. As they say don’t touch that dial!

The Zinwell Nextgen TV Box Requires an Internet Connection – Despite Claims to the Contrary

admin — Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:46:01 +0000

Zinwell’s new ATSC 3 Nextgen TV Box is the subject of my latest review. This device was eagerly anticipated by the cord cutting community as it was promised to tune DRM protected channels without the need for an Internet connection. Unfortunately those claims proved to be false.

The Zinwell Nextgen TV Box, retailing for $149, is designed for TVs without a built-in ATSC3 tuner. It’s a straightforward device – plug in your antenna, connect it to your TV, and you’re set to receive both ATSC 3.0 and the older 1.0 signals. The setup process is impressively quick, and the interface, while minimalistic, is user-friendly.

However, the device’s limitations soon became apparent. Despite its claims, the Zinwell box requires an Internet connection to decrypt ATSC 3.0 DRM channels, at least initially.

This contradicts the product description and the industry’s assurances. Just a few days ago broadcast industry association Pearl TV congratulated Zinwell on the product release claiming the new box is “A3SA security verified to operate without needing an internet connection for tuning to channels with protected broadcast content.” That clearly is not the case as the first thing the “quick start guide” urges consumers to do is connect to the Internet in order to watch encrypted channels.

After connecting to the internet and tuning into an encrypted channel, you can disconnect the Internet and still view it. But this process must be repeated for each encrypted channel. The duration these channels remain viewable without internet re-connection is unclear. I’ll be leaving my box off the Internet for the foreseeable future and will report back if the security credential expires.

Another downside is the box’s outdated security. Running on Android 11 with its last security update from August 2021, it’s significantly behind in terms of security patches. This is concerning, especially given the need for an internet connection to access certain features.

The update process is another area of frustration. It’s complex and not user-friendly, requiring the user to manually launch and sideload updates from deep within its Android operating system.

All of this is incredibly unfortunate given just how good the ATSC 3.0 standard is proving to be in my area when channels are not locked down. The quality of the over-the-air television signal is remarkable and the reception is notably improved. Unfortunately the actions the broadcast industry is taking regarding is likely going to hinder adoption.

See more of my ATSC 3.0 coverage here.

ATSC 3 TV Tuners Have an Expiration Date, Slow Progress on Gateway Devices and More..

admin — Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:49:55 +0000

The transition from the ATSC 1.0 to the ATSC 3.0 standard in over-the-air television broadcasting has been a topic of much discussion and concern, particularly regarding the DRM (Digital Rights Management) encryption applied to broadcast signals. This shift brings a significant limitation for viewers like myself who have enjoyed the freedom to watch and record television in the privacy of our homes.

In my latest video update on the ATSC DRM situation, I learned that every ATSC 3.0 tuner will have its decryption certificate expire after a certain length of time.

These certificates, essential for viewing encrypted signals, will expire after a predetermined period – varying from 10 to 30 years. For example, the certificates in devices like the ADTH box and Zapperbox are set to expire in 30 years. But the costs of these certificates are based on length AND quantity. Many manufacturers producing high volumes of tuners may opt for the shorter length certificates to remain profitable. And so far no manufacturer has disclosed how long their certs will last.

Given that the HDHomerun I reviewed over a decade ago is still running on my network today, it’s not unreasonable to have a tuners in use for lengths of time that exceed the certificate’s expiration date. At the moment these certificates are tied to the model number of the hardware being produced and are not renewable via firmware updates.

Another aspect of the ATSC 3.0 transition that has come to light is the ‘phone home’ feature of these devices. Regardless of whether an internet connection is necessary for television viewing, devices with ATSC 3.0 tuners will communicate back to broadcaster servers for certificate validation whenever they tune into an encrypted channel, provided an internet connection is available.

The progress—or lack thereof—in developing gateway devices for ATSC 3.0 has been another point of contention. Gateway devices, like the Tablo and HDHomeRun, are popular as they allow users to stream broadcast content across various devices within their home network. Unfortunately, due to the DRM encryption, creating compatible ATSC 3.0 gateway devices has been a challenge. This struggle is further complicated by compatibility issues with platforms like Apple TV, Roku, and Windows, among others.

Interestingly, the shift towards ATSC 3.0 has led to a potential change in how broadcasters might distribute high-bandwidth content like 4K. Rather than using valuable broadcasting bandwidth, it appears more likely that 4K content will be streamed over the internet, signaled by URLs pinged out by broadcasters over the air. This was revealed in the latest Zapperbox release notes:

As broadcasters seemingly retreat from utilizing public airwaves to their full potential, one wonders if these frequencies could be repurposed for community-benefiting uses, such as local access television. This would provide a new avenue for public access channels, which are currently struggling due to the decline in cable TV subscriptions and the consequent reduction in funding.

The ATSC 3.0 transition, marked by its DRM encryption and tuner expiration dates, raises critical questions about the future of over-the-air television broadcasting. As we move towards the 2027 deadline for the completion of this transition, the decisions made by broadcasters and regulators will significantly impact how we consume broadcast television in the years to come – if at all..

GT Media HDTV Mate – The most affordable ATSC 3 Tuner So Far

admin — Wed, 17 Jan 2024 19:27:24 +0000

In my latest video I take a look at the GT Media HDTV Mate, a portable USB over the air TV tuner that currently only works with Android devices like Android TV boxes, TVs and smartphones. Currently it’s the least expensive ATSC 3.0 compatible tuner but unfortunately it doesn’t support the DRM encryption that broadcasters are using to lock down their signals. It can also tune into ATSC 1.0 broadcasts.

The hardware has a USB plug on one side (for attaching it to the host device) along with a coax connector on the other end for an antenna. Also in the box is a USB-A to USB-C cable for smartphone connection, and an extension cable for smart TVs or TV boxes. For devices with a single USB port, like the Onn box I used for testing, an additional adapter like this Smays hub will be needed. The device also features an SD card slot for rudimentary DVR capabilities, although I couldn’t get this feature to work in my tests.

The setup process involves scanning for channels, which took about five minutes in my case. The channel guide, while functional, lacks a polished interface. Channel tuning speed varies based on the device used, but overall, it was reasonably quick. ATSC 3 channels took slightly longer to load than ATSC 1 channels. On both my Onn Box and Pixel 8 Pro smartphone, playback was smooth, although a 1080i ATSC 1 channel exhibited interlacing issues.

The device worked well with my Pixel 8 Pro, offering a similar app experience as on the TV. The concept of a portable tuner like this is appealing, especially for situations like emergency response where cell networks might be down. No Internet is required to tune into unecrypted broadcast TV (at the moment anyway..).

The GT Media HDTV Mate is not something I’d recommend for a primary tuning device but it does offera viable portable solution for ATSC 3 and ATSC 1 channels on Android devices. While it has its rough edges, it demonstrates the potential affordability of ATSC 3 tuners. However, the future of such innovative products seems uncertain with the looming encryption and DRM requirements broadcasters wish to impose on consumers.

ATSC 3.0 Patent Fight Continues – Industry Tells the FCC to Stay out of It

admin — Sun, 29 Oct 2023 12:29:52 +0000

The FCC’s ATSC 3.0 docket lit up this week with stakeholders urging the FCC to stay out of a patent dispute that threatens the emerging over the air television standard. I summarized some of these filings in my latest video.

Here’s the background: a few weeks ago LG announced they were removing ATSC 3.0 tuners from their new televisions. This decision came as the result of lawsuit that found LG in violation of a patent owned by a small company called Constellation Designs. This was a significant development because LG is one of the key partners who helped developed the ATSC 3 standard, and the patent covers how the ATSC 3 broadcast signal works.

In announcing their decision, LG asked the FCC to seriously consider enforcing “reasonable and non-discriminatory” (RAND) practices for all patents related to the ATSC 3.0 standard. RAND terms ensure that even if a technologies that make up the standard are developed by competing companies everybody is treated equally and fairly when it comes to licensing that technology to implement the standard.

In the case of ATSC 3.0 there are patent pools that roll-up all of the patents with each manufacturer paying a very reasonable fee to license everything. You can learn more in my video on the topic.

RAND practices have been a part of the ATSC 1.0 standard from the beginning, with the FCC adding them to the regulation in 1996. But with ATSC 3.0, broadcasters and TV makers asked the FCC to allow them to regulate RAND behavior outside of government regulation. This means that the ATSC 3.0 standards body, not the FCC, enforces RAND requirements.

The only penalty for not complying is getting kicked out of the ATSC association. But in the recent patent case against LG, Constellation Designs was never a part of the association in the first place so they had nothing to lose. And now Constellation Designs will collect royalties for their single patent that are 6 times higher than the cost for licensing the entire patent pool.

The industry’s response to LG’s suggestion of FCC regulation of RAND practices is one of vehement opposition. The National Association of Broadcasters, the Consumer Technology Association, One Media LLC (a subsidiary of Sinclair broadcasting) and even one of the patent pool administrators all registered their strong opposition. They believe that the transition to ATSC 3.0 should remain voluntary and market-based even with the risk of patent trolls coming out of the woodwork.

So, what’s next for the ATSC 3.0 patent fight? I think it’s likely that one of the ATSC principles will buy Constellation Designs to remove them from the equation. However, the threat of other potential patent holders finding their way to court remains. Without regulation around the RAND requirement, there’s room for groups to exploit potential loopholes – especially as there is no penalty from patent holders outside the ATSC group from suing.

For now, LG will wait things out as they file an appeal and perhaps hope for a friendly suitor for Constellation Designs. Until then, their new televisions won’t have ATSC 3.0 tuners.

As this story unfolds, I’ll be here to keep you informed. Stay tuned for more updates on this evolving topic.

New LG Televisions Will Not Have ATSC 3 Tuners Due to Patent Dispute

admin — Tue, 26 Sep 2023 13:47:22 +0000

In a surprising bit of news LG, a major TV manufacturer and co-developer of the ATSC 3 standard, announced its decision to discontinue support for ATSC 3 on their upcoming televisions. This surprising move is a direct result of a patent lawsuit, and the implications of this decision are significant for the adoption of the new standard. I cover the news in my latest video.

The news was first reported by Cord Cutters News, a trusted source for updates related to cord-cutting. LG also provided a detailed explanation regarding their decision in a recent FCC filing.

At the heart of the patent lawsuit is the A/322 physical layer standard, which is integral to receiving the ATSC 3 broadcast signal. A company named Constellation Designs asserted they had the patent for a portion of this standard. Despite LG’s disagreement with this claim, a Texas jury ruled against them. Consequently, LG is now obligated to pay $6.75 for every television they’ve sold bearing the NextGenTV logo to Constellation Designs LLC.

The judgment against LG was a paltry $1.6 million, and doing the math this equates to only about 250,000 televisions sold with ATSC 3 tuners installed. This does not bode well for the millions of installed tuners broadcasters will need in order to convince the FCC to allow a transition to the new standard – especially as a major manufacturer is now pulling support for the time being.

The ATSC 3 standard is a complex web of patents from a multitude of companies. To streamline the management of these patents, there are established patent pools that offer licenses at standardized rates that cost manufacturers around $3 per tuner. However, participation in these pools is not mandatory, leading to potential conflicts like the one LG encountered.

There’s a growing concern that other manufacturers utilizing this technology might find themselves embroiled in similar legal battles with Constellation Designs who now likely smells blood in the water. In their FCC filing LG expressed concern that other patent holders may also try and sue and extract more revenue from television makers.

So what’s next? Broadcasters were no doubt anticipating that beginning in 2024 more new televisions would have ATSC 3 capability built in. With LG pulling out, will Samsung, Sony and others do the same? Will the companies attempt to buy out Constellation Designs? Will the FCC step in to try and smooth things out? And can they even make an impact?

This television drama will continue. As they say, stay tuned!

ADTH Tuner Firmware Update Still Does Not Encrypt the HDMI Port

admin — Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:17:34 +0000

Last week I reviewed the new ADTH ATSC 3 TV tuner, the first external device that can decrypt DRM protected TV stations.

I discovered in the review that the ADTH is not protecting the HDMI output which is required according to the ATSC 3.0 DRM specifications. Some asked if recent firmware updates corrected this oversight.

After updating my box this morning my Windows laptop equipped with an Elgato Camlink USB HDMI capture device is still able to record encrypted stations:

The ADTH Nextgen TV Box Shows Us Just How Bad ATSC 3.0 Encryption Will Be..

admin — Sun, 03 Sep 2023 11:50:47 +0000

I recently got my hands on the $99 ADTH NextGen TV Box, the first certified tuner for ATSC 3.0 NextgenTV broadcasts that supports channels encrypted with DRM. You can see it in action in my latest review.

The ADTH is a basic tuner that plays back live TV to the television connected to its HDMI port. There are no DVR capabilities, and it only has a single tuner on board. It runs on Android but boots directly into its TV watching app. Some viewers have been able to shoehorn other apps onto it, but their custom tv watching app is the only one that can interact with the onboard tuner.

The device has an ethernet port, Wi-Fi, an HDMI output that supports 4K televisions and HDR, an AV out for analog audio, and an optical audio out. It only plays back on the TV it’s connected to, so the wifi and ethernet are used only for firmware and DRM decryption (more on that below). The antenna port is where you connect your antenna for receiving broadcasts. It supports AC4 audio decoding, making it compatible with older televisions.

The interface is incredibly Spartan. When you boot it up, it takes you directly to the TV viewing app. The channel guide is very limited, and the remote control is as basic as it gets, with no numbers on it. You’ll have to navigate through the channel guide or use the channel up and down buttons to find the channel you want to watch.

But the elephant in the room is the ADTH’s DRM playback capabilities. In my market, my NBC and CBS affiliates have both encrypted their ATSC 3.0 signals. And the ADTH is able to tune into them – provided I have an active Internet connection to do it. While I was able to take the box off the Internet without interrupting playback, it did require an active connection before I could switch to another encrypted channel.

This raises concerns about how the emergency broadcast system will work in the future if everything is encrypted and requires an internet connection for over the air content to play back.

Interestingly, this box allows you to directly capture footage out of the HDMI port on encrypted channels. I was able to capture the footage directly using my Elgato 4K USB capture dongle which does not allow capturing of encrypted HDCP HDMI signals. I tested a few other capture boards that restrict HDCP content and all of those worked too.

The broadcast industry, through an organization called Pearl TV, is forcing manufacturers to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to certify their players to protect the signal all the way to the television. This includes ensuring that even the HDMI signal is protected – yet this box was released without proper protection? This raises questions about just how serious broadcasters are in protecting their signals vs. trying to steer customers into expensive subscription streaming plans.

All that said the ADTH experience wasn’t all that great when it did successfully decrypt a channel. I encountered occasional playback issues where the video would start to stutter after a while but then correct itself. At this time the box does not have a signal strength meter so I was unable to determine if it was the signal or something else.

Channel surfing is also not fluid; there’s a long delay and a buffer before the channel starts playing. This delay is even longer for the DRM channels as it has to go out to the internet first to get its decryption keys.

If you’re looking to watch live TV that is encrypted via the new ATSC 3 DRM, this device will allow you to watch those channels. However, it only works on the TV it’s connected to, and the tuning quality is not as good as other options like the Zapperbox or the HDHomeRun. The ADTH also confirms my beliefe that DRM is completely unnecessary, especially given that they didn’t even bother to lock out its HDMI port from allowing direct video capture.

So, it works, but it’s not great. I’ll keep you updated as we make progress fighting the encryption of over-the-air television. Be sure to register your thoughts with the FCC on their official docket!

ATSC 3 DRM is Worse Than We Thought!

admin — Wed, 02 Aug 2023 15:20:24 +0000

I’ve been deeply involved in raising awareness about the broadcast industry’s intentions to encrypt free over-the-air television. Recent developments have shown that the situation with DRM encryption is eve worse than I initially thought. You can see more in my latest video.

Our collective efforts to inform the FCC about these concerns have been fruitful. Since my last update, the number of comments and filings on the FCC’s official transition docket has significantly increased. This surge in participation is heartening, but there’s still a long way to go. I urge everyone to continue voicing their concerns.

In a positive turn of events, the FCC has delayed the official transition to ATSC 3.0 until at least June 2027. This gives us more time to make our case and ensure that when the transition does occur, it doesn’t come with undue restrictions.

However, there’s concerning news on the horizon. Despite promises from Pearl TV, the organization behind this initiative, it seems that even certified devices can’t decrypt DRM protected content. This revelation comes as Silicondust, the makers of the HDHomerun, now have certified firmware for their hardware and apps – yuet those apps cannot decrypt the DRM content.

This directly contradicts Pearl TV’s earlier statements in June that certified devices would be able to decrypt broadcasts:

Thankfully, the security layer already included in NEXTGEN TV is being enabled now and is supported by all of the television manufacturers selling NEXTGEN TV-certified receivers.

A recent article by Jared Newman from Tech Hive further delved into the intricacies of this DRM. Shockingly, broadcasters could potentially delete DVR recordings from your own server after a certain period of time or block the recording of content outright. And if you’re not using a television connected directly to an antenna an Internet connection will be required to watch live television – that includes smart TVs using an app, tablets, computers and other devices.

Additionally, there could be restrictions that effectively prevent out-of-home viewing from network tuners. This means that every time you watch television or a recording, you will have to disclose your physical location.

The industry’s justification for these restrictions revolves around concerns of copyright violations. However, it’s evident that the real motive might be to protect retransmission fees they collect from cable and streaming service subscribers. With many consumers cutting the cord due to exorbitant fees, broadcasters seem to be taking measures to protect their revenue streams.

The essence of free over-the-air TV must be preserved if broadcasters wish to continue using the public airwaves. Viewers shouldn’t be burdened with unnecessary limitations in an effort to force them into paying exorbitant subscription fees. It’s crucial to continue voicing our concerns and ensuring that the public’s best interests are upheld.

I’ll be back with more on this soon including a new effort we’ll be undertaking to let the industry know we’re not going to stand for this!

TechHive Picks Up our ATSC 3.0 Encryption Story

admin — Sat, 29 Jul 2023 13:50:26 +0000

As many of you know Tyler the Antennaman and I have been on a mission to inform the public about the rapid encryption of what used to be free over the air television. To date we’ve had 7,600 people sign our petition to the FCC and added 2,000 new comments to the FCC’s docket about the issue.

TechHive this week covered the issue with an extensive piece that uncovers just how restrictive the DRM will be:

For DVR, broadcasters can set expiration dates on recordings or even block them outright. It’s unclear if broadcasters will do this, but ATSC 3.0 gives them the capability.

ATSC 3.0’s DRM has latency restrictions that effectively block out-of-home viewing from networked tuners such as the HDHomeRun Flex 4K.

Users will need an internet connection to stream local broadcasts around the home, for instance from an HDHomeRun tuner to a Roku player, and an occasional internet connection might be required for external tuner boxes.

Recordings won’t work without the original tuner that captured the programming, effectively preventing users from transferring programs they’ve recorded on a DVR to other devices, such as a laptop or tablet for away-from-home viewing.

With an HDHomeRun tuner, third-party apps must get independently certified to play encrypted ATSC 3.0 content. It’s unclear if programs such as Channels and Plex will do so.

It’s clear to see that broadcasters are eager to only provide the bare minimum live viewing experience to antenna viewers who don’t want to pay their exorbitant broadcast fees.

Let’s not forget that these stations don’t own the public airwaves that they want to turn into a toll road. We the taxpayers do. How does this serve the public benefit?

ATSC 3 DRM Update – We’re on the FCC Docket!

admin — Tue, 18 Jul 2023 11:45:10 +0000

Last week, I asked you to submit your thoughts to the FCC about why encrypting free over the air TV is a bad thing, and many of you have done so. We’ve seen some significant progress, and I want to share that with you in my latest video.

If you’re new to this topic, I recommend checking out my playlist with previous videos on this topic. The issue at hand is that broadcasters in the United States are encrypting their signals on the new ATSC 3 broadcast standard. This limits how you can watch and record television, essentially confining you to a television connected to a box, rather than the freedom we’re used to with our video consumption.

Here’s the latest on the campaign:

Our petition on change.org is nearing 7,500 signatures, and the momentum is still going strong. However, the most significant development is the increase in submissions to the FCC docket. Last week, the docket had 1,634 submissions. As of this morning, we have over 2,812 submissions, most of which are from concerned citizens like you. This is fantastic progress, and I want to thank everyone who has made submissions. If you haven’t yet, please consider doing so.

In terms of news, another network in my home state of Connecticut has joined the encryption club. WVIT-TV, Connecticut’s NBC affiliate, is now encrypting their broadcasts. They did this right in the middle of a recent severe weather event!

In other news, the company responsible for certifying devices for encryption, Pearl TV, has certified the Zinwell tuning box – the first box they’ve approved since rolling out encryption over a year ago. However, this box only allows you to watch the encrypted signals on a single television, with no recording or in-home streaming capabilities. And its price remains a mystery.

But there is some movement happening on the network tuner side. HDHomeRun devices have received a new firmware update that includes their Next-Gen TV certification release candidate. However, this doesn’t mean you can start watching encrypted channels just yet. The powers that be have to certify the HDHomerun to be able to decrypt content. Once they get approval, you’ll likely be able to watch these channels, but DVR capability is still a big question.

Unfortunately, this certification process and the ongoing cost of remaining compliant is likely out of reach for these groups, which could stifle innovation and competition in the cord cutting space.

We need to keep the pressure on. If you haven’t already, please consider submitting your thoughts to the FCC docket!

The FCC Responds to my ATSC 3 Encryption Complaint – They Want To Hear From You!

admin — Mon, 10 Jul 2023 22:44:00 +0000

The FCC reached out to me and is asking all of you who signed the petition to also file a comment in their docketing system for the ATSC 3 petition. This is very easy to do and will just take a few minutes. So far there are only about a dozen or so complaints filed. We can do better!!

I discuss this in my latest video.

Steps:

1. Click this link to be taken to the FCC filing form.

3. Fill in your information. A US address is required and note that this will be part of the public record.

4. Write your comment in the comment section. It’s important to provide some detail especially how this change will make it difficult for YOU to consume over the air television.

Below is what I submitted, you are free to re-purpose this for your own submission but DO NOT COPY AND PASTE. The commission values feedback on how this transition will impact consumers and each unique story helps build the case better than a form letter.

I am writing in opposition to DRM Encryption being part of the ATSC 3.0 standard. Over the last several weeks broadcasters have aggressively rolled out encryption on their ATSC 3 signals throughout the United States. At the moment this restricts most currently available tuners from being able to tune ATSC 3 content.

The standard’s voluntary rollout began with much promise. Prior to ATSC 3 being enabled here in Connecticut I could not reliably receive ATSC 1.0 content. When ATSC 3 spun up last year I could finally receive reliable over the air signals at my home. That was until WFSB-TV encrypted their broadcast and I’m now blocked from watching that station.

Encrypting over the air signals goes against the spirit of serving the public’s interest. Encryption adds an additional and unnecessary point of failure for receiving important information during emergency situations.

There are anti-trust implications too. Encryption restricts the consumer’s right to watch content from the public airwaves using tuners and personal recording equipment of their choice. With ATSC 1.0 consumers have many choices for watching and recording over the air television. With ATSC 3 only equipment blessed by the broadcasters through an arduous, opaque and expensive process will be allowed to tune content. One broadcaster, E.W. Scripps, purchased a manufacturer of tuning and recording equipment giving Scripps an advantage in the marketplace over competing products.

The broadcasters have said encryption is important for copy protection or other nonsense about protection from hackers and “deep fakes.” But the reality is they are trying to protect broadcast retransmission fees that now make up a significant portion of their revenue.

Lawyers for the broadcasters have effectively stopped every large scale retransmission effort making encryption unnecessary to protect their broadcast exclusivity rights. What this is really about is making it more difficult for everyday consumers to watch free over the air TV in an effort to push us back onto paid subscription services.

You can also find what other people have submitted by visiting this link to browse through the public filings.

It’s really important if you care about this issue to make a submission. It doesn’t have to be long – just long enough for you to convey the impact that DRM encryption will have in accessing broadcasts on the public airwaves.

I still plan to drop this petition off with the FCC and congressional stakeholders in person with the Antenna Man. But the more of us who tell the FCC directly the better!

Let’s Save Free TV and Stop ATSC 3.0 DRM! Sign my petition!

admin — Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:43:16 +0000

This week my local CBS affiliate, WFSB-TV, activated their ATSC 3.0 encryption making their signal inaccessible in my home with an HDHomerun tuner. And it’s not just here – broadcasters are accelerating the DRM roll-out all over the country in the hopes that no one will notice by the time they transition away from the current standard.

But we can put a stop to this. In my latest video I provide some more detail about this DRM problem, what it looks like when it hits your area, and direct you to my Change.org petition that I’ll personally deliver in Washington if we can get 25,000 signatures.

While devices currently locked out from playing this over-the-air content will likely get certified by the broadcasters to display it again, the time and cost of certification falls on the device manufacturer. Furthermore, broadcasters can revoke these licenses at any time, restricting entire families of devices from watching free over-the-air TV. I predict that even after certification, the ability to record, pause, rewind, or time-shift television shows will be significantly restricted.

Why are they doing this? It’s because broadcasters no longer rely solely on viewership for revenue; over half of their revenue comes from broadcast re-transmission fees they charge to cable, satellite and Internet providers. As more people cut the cord and forgo expensive streaming alternatives, there are fewer people paying the broadcast TV fees. This has led broadcasters to restrict access to free over-the-air television, pushing consumers towards subscription services.

But aren’t we allowed to record broadcast TV? While the Sony vs. Universal Studios Supreme Court decision in the 80s affirmed our right to record content, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) makes it illegal to circumvent copyright controls to make a recording. This means that, legally, consumers will be breaking the law if they record these encrypted broadcasts through some kind of circumvention.

In response to this issue, I’ve started a Change.org petition to raise awareness among members of Congress and consumer organizations. If the petition reaches 25,000 signatures I will personally bring it down to DC to deliver to US senators and the FCC.

Let’s not forget that the airwaves broadcasters in the US benefit from belong to the public. I believe that restricting what the public can do on public airwaves is counter to the longstanding policy about broadcasters providing a public benefit for the privilege of profiting from this public asset.

I’m urging all of you to take action before it’s too late!

Another Broadcaster in Boston Locks Down ATSC 3.0 Broadcasts with DRM

admin — Mon, 12 Jun 2023 15:50:00 +0000

Another broadcaster in Boston has locked down their ATSC 3.0 broadcasts. CBS affiliate WBZ has joined the ABC and NBC affiliates in denying the public the ability to watch TV the way they want.

Here’s the latest from RabbitEars.info. Boston is almost all red now when it comes to access to free over the air TV:

To learn more about this topic be sure to catch this video where I deep dive into the reasoning behind broadcasters locking down their broadcasts. Spoiler alert, it’s all about retaining their lucrative retransmission fees.

The ZapperBox M1 ATSC 3 Tuner is a Minimally Viable Product

admin — Wed, 31 May 2023 12:54:02 +0000

In my latest review I look at the ZapperBox M1, a device designed to tune the new ATSC 3 signals in the United States.

The ZapperBox M1 is a great example of a “minimally viable product.” It’s an ATSC 3 tuner box that currently just tunes live TV, but with future firmware updates it will eventually gain DVR capabilities along with in-home streaming to other TV devices.

The ZapperBox M1 is available in two models: a single tuner unit priced at $249 and a dual tuner unit at $279. The dual tuner unit will allow you to record something while you watch something else live or record two shows simultaneously once the DVR functionality is implemented. It also has a Micro SD card slot and USB ports for external storage devices that will be required for that future DVR functionality.

The initial DVR release, due out by July 4th weekend, will allow you to schedule recordings, but won’t do recurring recordings or season passes. Those features will be added in subsequent releases. There will be an annual fee of $30 for the DVR service, which covers the cost of the channel guide data.

The device is simple to use and set up. It connects to a TV via its HDMI port and boots right up to live television. It has a YouTube app installed, but no other apps are installed nor is there a way to add any.

The ZapperBox M1 works with both ATSC 3 and ATSC 1 signals. It has a nice old-school channel flipping capability, allowing you to quickly go through the channels by pushing up and down on the remote. It also has the ability to filter out channels, so you can customize your viewing experience to favorites, remove duplicates, or have it focus only on the ATSC 3 Nextgen signals.

One of the complexities of ATSC 3 broadcasts is the Dolby AC4 audio format, which many TVs do not support. The ZapperBox M1 handles this by doing all the audio down-mixing in hardware, ensuring compatibility with all TVs.

Another issue is that many broadcasters are beginning to encrypt their content with DRM. The ZapperBox M1 does not currently decrypt this content, but it will in the future once it goes through an approval process. The makers of the box say that they have DRM decryption working with DRM broadcasts at their lab in Tampa, FL.

For regions like mine where all of the local ATSC 3 stations live on the same broadcast frequency, the ZapperBox M1 might be worth considering vs. buying a new set with an ATSC 3 Tuner built in. The set up process took less than 10 minutes and it performs its single task of watching live television quite well. But it is quite expensive for its limited feature set at the moment.

Check out all of my ATSC 3 content here!

Broadcasters Roll Out Restrictive DRM Encryption on ATSC 3.0 Broadcasts

admin — Tue, 16 May 2023 00:05:05 +0000

In my latest video I discuss the concerning trend of broadcasters introducing encryption and Digital Rights Management (DRM) to ATSC 3 broadcasts in the United States. This move, while seemingly about preventing piracy and illegal re-transmission of signals, could significantly limit consumers’ ability to consume content in the way they want.

While consumers can watch ATSC 3 content live on next-gen certified televisions, they may face restrictions when trying to use apps like Plex or Channels for DVR recordings or outside-the-home viewing. There’s also the looming question of whether an Internet connection might be required to watch broadcast TV in the future.

I suspect that the motivation behind this move is largely to protect their re-transmission fee revenue broadcasters collected on a per-subscriber basis from cable companies and streaming services. Some estimates have it as high as $15 billion annually.

However, this shift towards DRM and encryption raises several questions and concerns. One of the most pressing is whether broadcasters could eventually charge consumers to watch what should be free television. While broadcasters are barred from doing so by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), I wouldn’t be surprised to see some broadcasters lobbying the FCC to allow it.

Another concern is the future of free TV content. As networks transition into streaming services, there’s a risk that high-quality content may become exclusive to paid streaming, leaving only local news and less desirable content for free broadcast TV. We’re already seeing examples of NBC, through Peacock and CBS, through Paramount+ offering content exclusive to those streaming apps that are not available on broadcast.

Given these concerns, I believe it’s crucial for consumers to voice their objections to the introduction of DRM in ATSC 3 broadcasts. I recommend reaching out to your senators and representatives, particularly those who have shown interest in accelerating the rollout of the ATSC 3 standard, to bring this issue to their attention.

Since this video was uploaded I heard from a bunch of viewers who were recently impacted by this change. Here’s what Matthew Mello sent to me on Twitter this morning:

Here the Comcast owned affiliate encrypts their ATSC 3 over the air signal making it more difficult to tune for free. If you want to DVR content or watch on a phone you’ll have to subscribe to cable to get those features – with Comcast picking up subscription AND retransmission fees.

There’s a reason the FCC used to limit media ownership in a market!

As a consumer and a tech enthusiast, I’m keeping a close eye on these developments. If DRM gets activated where I live I’ll be sure to share my experiences and continue to advocate for consumer rights in the broadcasting industry. Until then, I encourage everyone to stay informed and take action to protect our access to free over-the-air TV.