The beginning of this video gets very technical. Please, don’t skip this whole video as parts 2 and 3 are less technical, and contain really important information. If you are interested in the technical details, but are having a hard time understanding it, please rewatch the technical sections of the video. Or, ask questions in the comment section. I would love to respond to any questions, and others who understand it better may chime in as well! This video was the culmination of over a month of research, script writing, and planning. As a college student who works other jobs, a major project like this can take up a lot of time. If you like this video, please share it with as many people as you can, to help my channel out with the RU-vid algorithm! Also, if you’d like to support me as an independent creator, consider joining my Patreon or RU-vid membership. There’s also a buy me a coffee link in the description and channel bio. Thanks for everyone who supports my channel!
Your video is well researched, and even the technical details are clearly summarized, but the reference to Realtek may mislead. The finished product either infringes or it doesn't, depending on whether the patent claims describe it. That's regardless of whether a Realtek chip or some other is used, unless Realtek or one of its competitors were to absorb the $6.75 license fee and pass its license on with its chip. Only LG has been sued, so far, but I believe C.D. patent infringement was written into the ATSC3 Standard itself, except for a QPSK option. QPSK, however, provides about a third of the typical payload and requires 10 dB greater C/N. I wish there were some lesser, non-infringing compromise outside of the standard that would interoperate with Standard-compliant sets, but I doubt that such exists. Thanks for your video.
I have no sympathy for ATSC-3. It includes DRM and encryption making a nonsense of "the public's airwaves". The idea that a TV maker can make their profit by inflicting ads on the viewer is a bad thing. ATSC-1 works just fine. The practical effect of a switch to ATSC-3 will be: 1) People will have to buy a new converter box that costs $100s of dollars rather than the $30 for an ATSC-1 box. 2) With the new box some channels still won't come in because the box lacks the keys for that one. 3) The DVR feature of the ATSC-1 box is waaaaaay better than what you can do with the ATSC-3 box. 4) The broadcasters are free to change the key they use so your box quits working
When IBM acquired the company I was working for they required us to sign agreements to the effect that anything we did anywhere while employed by them would become their intellectual property.
12 Reasons why OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail. Just say NO to (DRM). Tell your USA Government about the Hostile Takeover of (OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV) issues listed below. DRM (Digital Rights Management) Encrypted TV Station's signals. Why? Some 3.0 tuners at this time require you stay on the internet to decode DRM 3.0 TV Stations. Why? 3.0 Currently no 4K and you only get the Simulcasted main channel and no sub channels. Channel Crawling = super slow channel changing (DRM 5 + seconds slow). No sound because of Dolby AC4 audio codec does not have a legal open source license to decode legally on many devices. Some 3.0 tuners have Out of sync audio to video problems. Private Home Networked OTA antenna tuner boxes like (Tablo TV box) can not get official certified approval for DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV. Why? You may need non OTA home pay internet for updates and to unlock DRM encrypted ATSC 3.0 tv channels. Possible DRM restrictions on DRM ATSC 3.0 recordings and no viewing anywhere on any device with no sound. Emergency alert messages can not be received if DRM is blocking them. OTA DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail because the FCC is not going to turn off ATSC 1.0 TV stations for many years if not enough people buy 3.0 TVs and 3.0 boxes. No one has solve the problem of no government money for free DRM 3.0 TV tuner boxes because 1.0 TV turners and recorders will not work after that TV Station switches to 3.0 TV broadcasts. (Range and signal error correction) OR (more sub channels and near 4k picture) trade off problem. FCC is not forcing any 1.0 TV Stations to move over to 3.0 TV. So some TV stations will be on 1.0 and others will be on DRM 3.0. The FCC is only allowing OTA Simulcasts of the ATSC 1.0 main channel at this time on DRM ATSC 3.0 NEXTGEN-TV. DRM ATSC 3.0 is a not finished product and is a work in progress mix of unproven ideas that has never gotten full FCC approval at this time. Software updates for 3.0 tuner boxes may be needed for changes made to the unfinished and future added new official ATSC 3.0 standards modules. Patent License problems. LG no longer sells TVs with ATSC 3.0 tuners. Some 3.0 TV tuners companies may go out of business or stop updates leaving you with no DRM or software updates. OTA ATSC 3.0 is better but is not perfect and still can be affected by weak tv signals: (distance, weather, planes, trees, buildings, trucks, poor antenna, etc). FCC rules that 5 percent of old ATSC 1.0 coverage area does not need to be covered anymore = (SHORTER RANGE). Viewing zone outside of your 15 minute city or town could be blocked. Your TV viewing habits could be tracked by your serial number or IP address. ATSC 3.0 is updatable until it is not updatable without new hardware tuners (ATSC 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0......). Some of these 3.0 TV issues may be fixed over time. This is only some of the mess with DRM ATSC 3.0 TV. This is my opinion why DRM ATSC 3.0 TV will fail. IMO. Stay on OTA 1.0 TV until DRM is removed from OTA ATSC 3.0 by law. It is the people versus the hostile takeover by private DRM 3.0 TV stations for control over the USA public airwaves. IMO 2024...
In an emergency, when the Internet is down. ATSC 3.0 may not be viewable. Who the heck thought this was a good idea? The people who developed ATSC 3.0 were likely more interested in money and broadcasters then the public. And the FCC, whose been off the job for years, has not been doing a thing about it! All they've become is another taxing authority, selling off spectrum. And if you think the buyers will be paying for it, you're dense. That will come out in our bills in one way or another! Oh, the other thing I think no one is covering. DRM may be there to push antenna viewers towards the more profitable (to the broadcaster by way of rebroadcasting fees) towards a pay service. Thus ending free over the air TV. This should be the deal for them. If you turn on DRM, you can't get rebroadcasting fees. There, fixed it for you!
I don't think it's in jeopardy, I think it's already dead. Being crippled with DRM is already a non-starter for consumers, but there's barely any hardware support for it (the percentage of TVs out there with ATSC 3.0 tuners is probably in the very low single digit percent). There's also barely any broadcasts with it. It's all well and good to light up an entire Television Market Area on a map because there's ATSC 3.0 there, but that just means that at least one channel is broadcasting somewhere in that market. One tower does not cover the entire market, some of the markets are geographically huge, and it doesn't even mean that all channels for people within range are ATSC 3.0. And as you pointed out, there's currently zero momentum for that deployment. For that matter, there are zero ATSC 3.0 broadcasts (or plans for any broadcasts) in Canada, despite Canada and the US operating essentially a shared broadcast space. So, we have minimal hardware support, minimal broadcast support, minimal momentum, patent encumbrance with excessive licensing fees, and the situation is only getting worse over time, not better. For that matter, from the consumer perspective, ATSC 3.0's biggest advantages don't actually require ATSC 3.0. Most ATSC broadcasts are MPEG-2, and a big increase in quality and spectrum efficiency can be had by just switching to h.264... which is already part of the ATSC 1.0 spec. And adding 4K and HDR and other things to the ATSC 1.0 spec would be easy, since it's largely just a software change. As far as I can tell, literally the only relevant advantage that ATSC 3.0 has going for it is the more efficient physical layer, and broadcasters will probably sap away most of the advantages that provides by trying to cram as much as they can into the spectrum, pushing signal integrity to the limits.
Excellent informative video! The rollout of ATSC 3.0 should not be jeopardized by greed. Let's move forward and get this cleared up in a timely fashion. The Friendly Candy Company needs to step in before ATSC 3.0 turns sour.
Its over for ATSC 3.0. It just can't compete with fast channels. Its going to go down just like the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD debacle. DRM is destroying ATSC 3.0! When you leave a new broadcast standard up to corporate America - this what you get. Why buy a ATSC 3.0 tuner like I did with GTMedia's HDTV Mate and I can't watch the channels that I want due to DRM? You are not getting what you paid for. A ripoff. It would be interesting to note how many ATSC 3.0 tuners boxes were returned due to DRM? If a ATSC 3.0 tuner is not made by a major TV manufactor (who had years of designing and manufacturing tuners) its most likely crap IMHO. My old ATSC 1.0 USB tuner is made by LG.
New issue with live PBS TV streaming over internet not OTA (over the air) TV is that PBS has locked me out because PBS says that 35 miles away is too far away to watch their PBS live stream.
Note: I currently get all 5 PBS channels OTA (over the air) from WETA Washington DC with my outdoor antenna. So even pay internet can not repair Fair Use of live TV signals issues.
The current rollout of ATSC 3 relied on carving out bandwidth from existing markets with existing equipment. Eventually, the excess bandwidth will dry up, and the only way to roll out more ATSC 3.0 stations would be to switch from 1.0 to 3.0, and that's not going to happen until ATSC 3 tuners and TVs are cheap and affordable.
Basically if ATSC 3.0 fails in the US, all the Nextgen equipment purchased by consumers, both TV’s and set-top box tuners, will become very expensive ATSC 1.0 tuners, nothing more. The other problem is that TV manufacturers that do include ATSC 3.0 tuners hardly make it known to consumers, instead emphasizing the streaming capabilities of smart TV’s to push people into paying for more streaming services. You practically have to dig through a manual to double check what kind of tuner a new TV has built in. The NextGen logo might be somewhere on the packaging- maybe. Why don’t manufacturers put some effort into advertising the new standard to consumers?
I can see certain channels having DRM if they are subscription. By the same token,these channels need to have unscrambled content to fulfill their duty to the public.If you broadcast a movie channel with DRM,you need to provide news or sports or older content on a subchannel.The public has a right to information over public airwaves.
DRM as currently implemented seems extremely problematic. If I am required to have a web connection for DRM to work it functionally disenfranchises anyone who doesn't have or wants to have the internet hooked up to their tv. The licensing with manfacturers seems pretty onerous which is why LG probably dropped it. Good standard and they're screwing it up since NAB is convinced they are right and my position is an odd "one man out" minority. One of us is right so we'll see who it is.
non-uniform constellations ...geeky and neat .. we will be able to develop and use this technology when the patent expires in around 20 years... just look at the ubiquity of cheap (sub $1) mp3 players that exist now that mp3 is not covered by any patents.. ..oh and we can use the .gif format without worry now too!.. ....greed often prevents new technologies from becoming widely available when they are first invented....
As far as I'm concerned- -I do not need ATSC 3.0. In the end, it;s adoption will only serve to monetize what is FREE now. So, take your patents and eat them.
Some people only have cellphone plans for internet service. Hughes net or other similar companies are my choices for internet, Verizon home internet isn't available in my area, so 3.0 is not going to work for rual Americans that are in my situation. Ahh yeah dial up internet because we still have the old phone lines from the 70-80's no fiber optics, no DSL, the cable company wanted $5k to run a line to my house and that was 15 years ago, so no telling how much they would want today.
No. ATSC 3.0 reeks any way you slice it. The best thing to happen to 3.0 is blocking watchers from viewing it. Any complicated digital code bloatware is trash. Thumbs down for forcing this garbage on us. I'm not subscribing.
Question: Since news, breaking news and energy program interruptions are required for everyone to pickup,. Could the FAA since they have control of what is broadcast through the air? If you look up energy broadcast information, it should be in there that information can not be encrypted. We need to get the FCC and FAA on this subject. If they find out stations are keeping these type of broadcast encrypted, could the station be fined? Stations may not be encrypted if they are forced to not have these types of broadcasts encrypted.
