Will America's Favorite Technology Go Dark?

Ant wrote to mention that MSNBC is reporting on the upcoming proposed digital television switchover planned for the end of 2006. From the article: "That's the date Congress targeted, a decade ago, for the end of analog television broadcasting and a full cutover to a digital format. If enforced, that means that overnight, somewhere around 70 million television sets now connected to rabbit ears or roof-top antennas will suddenly and forever go blank, unless their owners purchase a special converter box. Back when the legislation was written, New Year's Eve 2006 probably looked as safely distant as the dark side of the moon. But now that date is right around the corner and Congress and the FCC are struggling mightily to figure out what to do."

Comments

Damn the media

[Anonymous Coward]

Keep in mind, the original legislation did state that 85% of the TV viewership must be on digital TV before they will simply turn it off: "Under federal law, analog service will continue until most homes (85%) in an area are able to watch the DTV programming." (from http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html#needanewtv) MSNBC is just making news of a moot point. Granted, they mentioned this in the text, too: "That's where the Congressional loophole comes in. Congress can ignore the end-of-2006 cut-off if fewer than 85 percent of households have digital television sets." I really hate the media.

National TV-Turnoff Week

[DrJimbo]

What a great story to start off National TV-Turnoff Week.

A lot of people do not have their facts straight..

[nsafreak]

This is NOT a conversion from analogue TV to HDTV. It is a conversion from analogue TV to digital TV and there is a BIG difference. Does sending a digital signal allow the broadcasting station to send a HDTV broadcast? Yes. Do they HAVE to transmit a HDTV broadcast? NO. The fact is a lot of consumers, how many I do not know, already have the capability to receive a digital transmission. This is done through a variety of methods such as subscribing to a cable or satellite service. Folks with either of those services will likely not notice a change.

Now the folks with an old analogue only TV set that are receiving their signal from rabbit ears are going to notice a change once the analogue signals are shut off. Some may subscribe to satellite or cable I suppose but there will likely be a fair amount that do not wish to and will complain LOUDLY. It will only get louder if the ATSC tuner boxes necessary to get their sets working with the new signal are too expensive. The other option of course will be to buy a set with an ATSC tuner built in but a lot of folks won't like doing that either.

Right now I would say it's quite probable that the switchover will be delayed.

Re:It's about plugging the analog hole

[MojoStan]

Your insightful dystopian rant about strong DRM restrictions reminded me of another important deadline related to digital television:

After July 2005, it will be illegal to manufacture or import over-the-air DTV tuners that can ignore the "broadcast flag."

So we have about 2 months to buy an OTA HDTV tuner card for our HTPCs. Here's a link to the EFF's take on this subject: The Broadcast Flag and "Plug & Play": The FCC's Lockdown of Digital Television.

It's NOT about selling new TVs...

[Desprez]

I invite evertone to read this article I realise that your not going to, this is Slashdot after all, but it answers many questions.

To quote from BoingBoing:

This long, excellent article on the history of broadcast spectrum allocation in America is the single best explanation of the mess that we're in today. In short: greedy broadcasters tricked Congress into giving them free spectrum for a second set of digital channels, so that Americans who bought digital TVs would have something to watch. Then they did nothing with them. Meantime, cops and firefighters and EMTs are (literally) dying for some of that squat-upon spectrum so that they can coordinate their rescue efforts.

Among other things, it explains WHY a date was set for a crossover to HDTV. Sure TV works just fine now, so why switch you ask? Actually, it's NOT about trying to sell the public new TVs. It sounds simple, but that's a very narrow view that doesn't see the whole picture and all the politics behind what's going on. The linked article sheds quite a bit of light on that.

Re:It's about plugging the analog hole

[bLanark]

"pirate" is the wrong term here. "recorded under our fair use rights" may be better.

Clear your mind and prepare for this: The US has better rights than the UK when it comes to "fair use". In fact, we in the UK have no real concept of it.

For example, it is illegal to record music onto another medium - buy vinyl, you can't put it on cassette for the car. Buy CD, you can't rip them. Not legally, anyway.

In fact, the last time I looked at it, it was illegal to _lend_ someone music - if I want to let you listen to my CD, I have to bring it to your house and be there while it's played. You can't listen to it if I'm not there.

Time-shifting _is_ allowed, but you cannot keep the recording at watch it again and again.

So, from a UK point of view, almost everyone with an mp3 player (for example) is a "pirate", unless they have bought their music exclusively from online sources with a corresponding license. Grannies (or anyone else) who share recorded TV programmes are pirates too, as are people who lend CDs, cassettes, DVDs, VHS videos, and vinyl records to others.

So, from _my_ p.o.v., there is no "fair use" except time-shifing. Sorry for using the term "pirate", which doesn't really reflect the reality in the USA and probably several other places. I really don't know the europe-wide position on this, and I _suspect_ that Australia has laws at least as strict as ours.