Opinions varied among the comments received in the FCC’s June 22 NPRM on ATSC 3.0, five years into its voluntary deployment (see 2207060019), about whether the technology scored a hit with consumers. There appeared to be consensus in the comments posted Tuesday in docket 16-142 about keeping in place for now the requirement that TV broadcasters transmit their primary 3.0 video streams in compliance with ATSC's A/322 physical layer protocol standard. The A/322 requirement is due to expire March 6 unless the FCC reinstates it.
Broadcasters want the FCC to allow the ATSC 3.0 substantially similar requirement to sunset and remove other limits on 3.0 broadcasts, but MVPD groups and Public Knowledge say those restrictions must remain to avoid pressure on consumers, according to comments posted Tuesday in docket 16-142.
MPEG LA and InterDigital urged the FCC not to get involved in regulating patent licensing for ATSC 3.0 amid evidence that the free market was working well and showing no signs of license irregularities or abuses, in comments posted Monday in docket 16-142. The comments were due Monday in the FCC’s NPRM on all aspects of the ATSC 3.0 deployment, including whether 3.0-essential patents are being licensed on reasonable and nondiscriminatory (RAND) terms (see 2207060019).
Sinclair Broadcast reached agreements with two Korean networks to collaborate on ATSC 3.0 tech in both Korea and the U.S., it said in a news release Monday. The deals with Korean Broadcast System (KBS) and Munhwa Broadcasting Corp. (MBC) include developing 3.0 TV technology and data distribution business opportunities, the release said. "KBS is interested in revitalizing the ATSC 3.0 receiver market including vehicles and mobile devices, developing disaster broadcasting technologies, and discovering various innovative service models that combine terrestrial broadcasting and 5G communication technologies,” said KBS President Eui-chul Kim. “I hope that the ATSC 3.0 Enhanced GPS technology, which has succeeded in commercialization in Korea, will be expanded to the U.S. self-driving mobility market in cooperation with the three companies,” said Sung-Jae Park, MBC president.
Broadcasters disagreed whether the number of FM6 “Franken FM” stations should be allowed to expand and whether interference protections for Channel 6 should be rolled back, in reply comments posted Tuesday in docket 03-185. Incumbent noncommercial educational stations should be allowed to move to Channel 200, NPR said. A “narrow proposal” to loosen interference protections “provides the framework" to benefit the public "without harming either group of licensees,” NPR said. There has been no interference testing involving ATSC 3.0 receivers, NAB said. “NAB urges the Commission to retain the existing channel 6 protection requirements at this time.” Disney and its station WPVI-TV Philadelphia also said interference protections should remain in place. Interference concerns about NCE stations on Channel 6 are based on outdated technology, said the Educational Media Foundation. “EMF, in all of its years of operating its reserved-band FM stations in Channel 6 markets, has yet to see any substantial interference caused to a Channel 6 station -- particularly since the digital transition.” A group of public media entities said the FCC should reject any proposals that would repurpose TV spectrum or threaten its integrity. “Any modification” of TV Channel 6 protection requirements “would run the risk not only of FM radio stations causing interference to current TV reception, but also causing material constraints on the availability of spectrum for television,” said America’s Public Television Stations, PBS and others. The record shows the FCC should allow new FM6 stations, said LPTV broadcaster Cocola Broadcasting. “It is purely speculative whether other stations would introduce new interference.” A group of existing FM6 licensees disagreed. “It is reasonable to limit FM6 service at this time to those stations with a significant history of FM6 service,” said the Preserve Community Programming Coalition. LPFM group REC Networks also objected to expanding FM6. “FM6 licensees have no true accountability to their communities through the lack of a public file requirement and have even fewer accountability requirements than LPFM stations,” REC said.
An anticipated FCC order on ATSC 3.0 multicasting is taking longer than expected and may be slowing aspects of the transition to the new standard, broadcast industry officials told us. The Media Bureau has continued to grant requests for special temporary authority as a workaround, but some say that’s not enough. “We have markets backed up where we aren’t going to be able to launch until we have this flexibility,” said John Hane, CEO of 3.0 consortium BitPath.
NPR and FM6 broadcasters now agree that existing FM6 stations should be allowed to continue and that Channel 6 should be made available for noncommercial educational stations, but NAB and public TV groups have concerns about repurposing spectrum needed for the ATSC 3.0 transition, according to comments posted in docket 03-185. “Any reduction in available spectrum could hinder both noncommercial and commercial television stations as they voluntarily and rapidly adopt NextGen TV,” said a public TV joint filing. Proposals to limit the number of FM6 broadcasters and drop Channel 6 interference protections also drew concern from broadcast commenters. “Limiting FM6 operations to those who happened to take a stab at investing in the technology for a six-month Engineering STA is an arbitrary cut-off,” said Common Frequency.
Radio communications and TV "hobbyist" Roger Davis, a self-described “rural resident at the fringe” of a small TV market in eastern Ohio, sees the ATSC 3.0 transition “as an opportunity for broadcasters to serve rural populations in ways never before possible,” said his filing posted Thursday at the FCC in docket 16-142. His were the very first comments received in the FCC’s NPRM on all aspects of 3.0, five years into its voluntary deployment (see 2207060019). On the NPRM’s call for feedback on the market availability of 3.0 receivers, “my perception as a consumer is that while receivers are available, they are extremely limited in terms of choice at this time,” said Davis. He has been researching new TVs from several top manufacturers, “but I see that the ATSC 3.0 tuner capable models are restricted to higher priced units,” he said. Since NextGenTV stations “are generally simulcasting on lighthouse transmitters with no additional content or features, there is no compelling reason for me to switch to a new expensive television at this time,” he said. The 3.0-capable SiliconDust gateway device he bought in October 2020 “is fine for my hobbyist needs right now,” he said. But he worries that “much of the promise of ATSC 3.0 will be left behind as streaming options become more profitable and more prevalent,” he said. NextGenTV’s backers cite the current availability of many dozens of 3.0-capable TV models from LG, Samsung and Sony, at price points starting under $500, with approximately eight more models on the way from Hisense later this year. Comments in the NPRM are due Aug. 8, replies Sept. 6.
Comments are due Aug. 8, replies Sept. 6, in docket 16-142 in the FCC’s NPRM on all aspects of the ATSC 3.0 deployment (see 2206220067), including the possible sunset of the substantially similar requirement, and whether 3.0-essential patents are being licensed on fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, said a notice for Thursday’s Federal Register. The NPRM also seeks comment on the availability of 3.0 devices to consumers.
An NAB-backed Senate bill to open a window to allow low-power television stations to upgrade to better-protected Class A status is opposed by some LPTV groups, but lawmakers are looking to move it this year, said legislators and LPTV industry officials in interviews.