ATSC 3.0 DRM and Silicondust

[lifespeed 42]

They just shut down two major ATSC 1.0 TV stations in my market in favor of ATSC 3.0.  So I start looking into it, and of course I can buy a couple SiliconDust HDHomeRun Flex 4K ATSC 3.0 NextGen tuners.  A little more reading reveals the stations can't resist DRM-ing the transmissions, and this has created a problem that borked reception.  But they say they're releasing some information and fixes for DVRs, etc.

Where does Emby server for Windows fall in this mess?  SiliconDust seems to think it isn't something they are part of, at least for the HDHomeRun, as they're not the recording device.  I guess that would be Emby.  Does this mean I won't be able to record ATSC 3.0 with Emby for many years?

 

Edited May 3 by lifespeed

[rdhardi 19]

Hi. I can't answer your "many years" question, but I can comment on the current state of ATSC 3.0 in Emby. As long as a network has not turned on DRM encryption, you should be able to record an ATSC 3.0 channel.

In my market,  NBC and FOX turned on DRM encryption almost from the start. But CBS and ABC are not encrypted (as of this post) and I record regularly in Emby from both of them. Also, once a network turns on encryption, that channel is no longer available in Emby. Hope that helps!

[lifespeed 42]

That's the question: will Emby do whatever the link I posted requires to play their DRM game. NBC is one of only two ATSC 3.0 channels in my area.

Edited May 4 by lifespeed

[jkramer 10]

7 hours ago, lifespeed said:

They just shut down two major ATSC 1.0 TV stations in my market in favor of ATSC 3.0.

San Jose? Are you sure it's not a reception issue? I don't think the FCC will let them do this yet.

[RanmaCanada 360]

40 minutes ago, lifespeed said:

That's the question: will Emby do whatever the link I posted requires to play their DRM game. NBC is one of only two ATSC 3.0 channels in my area.

Emby legally can't as that's against the law. Read the DMCA.

https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/circumventing-copyright-controls

The DMCA prohibits circumventing access-control measures. 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1). For example, if you cannot watch a particular copyrighted DVD on your laptop because of an encryption system, the DMCA makes it unlawful for you to bypass this access-control measure. Access-control measures may also be found on eBooks, Internet streaming platforms, and password-protected sections of websites, among other things. Note that there is no ban on the act of circumventing copy-control measures, but it is illegal for anyone to provide you with the technological tools to do so. In any event, some copyright holders merge access-control and copy-control measures in the same DRM system, making it impossible to circumvent copy-controls (which is not prohibited) without circumventing access-controls (which is prohibited).

The DMCA also prohibits trafficking in devices or tools that help other people circumvent access-control and copy-control measures. 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(2), (b). "Trafficking" means making, selling, giving away, or otherwise offering these devices or tools to the public. Beware: you can "traffic" in circumvention tools simply by posting them on your website or linking to other websites that host them. For example, in 1999 a Norwegian teenager created a software program called "DeCSS" that allowed users to circumvent CSS, the encryption technology used by movie studios to stop unlicensed playing and copying of commercially distributed DVDs. A number of websites posted the source and object code for DeCSS on the Internet, and other websites linked to them. The Second Circuit held that hosting and linking to the DeCSS code violated the DMCA's anti-trafficking provisions, and that this application of the DMCA did not violate the First Amendment. See Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001). This decision is controversial, and it is not clear that other courts would necessarily follow its reasoning. Nevertheless, it illustrates how risky it is to host or even link to devices or tools that enable others to break access- and copy-controls.

Fair use is not a defense to a prohibited act of circumvention or trafficking. It does not matter that you or someone else has to circumvent DRM in order to make fair use of a copyrighted work. This is one of the reasons that the DMCA is so controversial.

Edited May 4 by RanmaCanada

[lifespeed 42]

You misunderstand, recording can be allowed by dispensation of the broadcasters with support by the recording device.

[RanmaCanada 360]

12 hours ago, lifespeed said:

You misunderstand, recording can be allowed by dispensation of the broadcasters with support by the recording device.

If they are enabling DRM, they have obviously decided to not allow recording on anything but their supported/approved devices, ergo Emby can not, and more than likely will not support it as they are not supported or approved. The fact that new devices have to built and even then there is no guarantee should be a clear notification of that. It will more than likely be a year or more before hardware is released that supports this, and at that point you'll probably need to wait longer for PC cards that will support it, IF they decide to allow PC support.

[lifespeed 42]

14 hours ago, jkramer said:

San Jose? Are you sure it's not a reception issue? I don't think the FCC will let them do this yet.

It appears on of my two ATSC 1.0 tuners failed.  The ATSC 3.0 with DRM support question remains.

[lifespeed 42]

38 minutes ago, RanmaCanada said:

If they are enabling DRM, they have obviously decided to not allow recording on anything but their supported/approved devices, ergo Emby can not, and more than likely will not support it as they are not supported or approved. The fact that new devices have to built and even then there is no guarantee should be a clear notification of that. It will more than likely be a year or more before hardware is released that supports this, and at that point you'll probably need to wait longer for PC cards that will support it, IF they decide to allow PC support.

The question regarding displaying DRM ATSC 3.0 remains.  Displaying and recording are two separate issues, I would rather hear from the Emby team than speculation.

[ebr 14959]

19 hours ago, lifespeed said:

The question regarding displaying DRM ATSC 3.0 remains.  Displaying and recording are two separate issues, I would rather hear from the Emby team than speculation.

Nothing is really known at this time but a system like Emby is actually counter to the main purpose of DRM.  Emby is designed to give you unfettered access to your media from absolutely anywhere on any device.  DRM is designed to keep you from being able to do exactly that.

Therefore, never say never but the folks implementing DRM are doing so specifically to limit the ability of systems like ours to be able to access their content.

[Ronstang 205]

2 hours ago, ebr said:

Therefore, never say never but the folks implementing DRM are doing so specifically to limit the ability of systems like ours to be able to access their content.

Just another nail in the coffin of traditional media and it's delivery.  They are circumventing "fair rights" which was established way back when they feared the VHS recording would cause them financial harm, it did not, it only offered them more opportunity to make money.  

Cable TV and even broadcast TV is on the outs for a reason, instead of developing the talent and mindset to deliver things people are willing to spend money on they are trying to lock down 60 year old reruns of shows that have been in syndication my entire life.

I only still have Cable TV because I am recording everything I can on movie channels that don't have commercials and populating my emby server with that content.  Currently if I watch only one movie a day I will likely die before I watch them all.  At some point either due to this BS or it becoming too expensive I will dump Cable and never look back.  I can buy streaming packages for the few channels I actually watch.  I currently have hundreds of channels yet only watch a handful, maybe 8, and my Cable bill alone is $200.  These idiots are too stupid to realize why people are dumping their arse.