Motorola Mobility “overstates the complexities" associated with building ATSC 3.0 reception into smartphones (see 1709130050), said Robert Folliard, chairman of the Advanced TV Broadcasting Alliance of low-power TV interests. Folliard’s group is urging the FCC to require ATSC 3.0 reception in smartphones when 3.0 broadcasts become available to 25 percent of the U.S. population. Motorola said that policy position has the company “concerned” because mandating 3.0 smartphone functionality “without regard to consumer demand is not in the public interest,” and would involve “significant technical challenges and limitations.” But Folliard thinks “many of the same issues identified by Motorola are ones that carriers must solve in order to take advantage of the 600 MHz spectrum recently purchased in the auction,” he told us Wednesday. “Regardless, the challenge is worth unraveling since the upside to consumers is so high.”

NAB somewhat softened its opposition to including the A/322 document on “Physical Layer Protocol” in the FCC's final ATSC 3.0 rules along with the A/321 standard it supports including on “System Discovery and Signaling,” it told commission staff in meetings Wednesday, according to an ex parte filing posted Monday in docket 16-142. NAB still thinks adopting A/322 “could risk stifling innovation” and force broadcasters to return to the FCC “repeatedly for permission to make changes as the standard and associated technology evolves,” it said. “Nevertheless, NAB understands that some commenters believe that there may be some value in adopting the full physical layer of the Next Gen standard, including A/322, to ensure that consumer electronics manufacturers can build television receivers with confidence.” With that in mind, NAB “respectfully submits” the FCC “can provide the certainty the consumer electronics industry desires with the flexibility broadcasters seek while minimizing regulatory burdens.” it said. Under the NPRM’s proposal, broadcasters opting to deploy ATSC 3.0 “will continue to be required to transmit at least one free, over the air transmission in standard definition or higher quality,” NAB said. “For that transmission, NAB proposes that broadcasters rely on both components of the physical layer, that is, A/321 and A/322,” but that A/322 not be required for any other ATSC 3.0 services, it said. NAB also wants the requirement to incorporate A/322 to “sunset automatically” after three years unless the FCC extends it, but only through a follow-up rulemaking, it said. At CTA, "we have not reviewed" the NAB ex parte filing "and have no comment," Brian Markwalter, senior vice president-research and standards, emailed us Monday. CTA wants the FCC to write its final ATSC 3.0 rules to “encourage” adoption of the A/322 document, it said in reply comments in June (see 1706090026). But in keeping with the voluntary, market-driven nature of the ATSC 3.0 migration, “CTA does not seek a requirement to implement A/322,” it said then.

The FCC likely will loosen its broadcast ownership rules for top-four TV stations, which could give broadcasters increased leverage and make retransmission consent negotiations with MVPDs tougher, Cowen analyst Paul Gallant emailed investors Wednesday. Broadcaster ability to own two must-have stations in a market "would clearly enhance prospects" in retrans talks, Cowen said, pointing to Time Warner Cable's subscriber losses in its 2013 dispute with CBS (see reports in the Aug. 26 and 30 issues of this publication). Cowen said since Chairman Ajit Pai said MVPD consolidation hurts broadcasters, it's unlikely the FCC would block that greater broadcaster negotiating leverage with limits on joint retrans. It also said broadcast ownership rules changes could lead to station swaps across multiple markets, with numerous broadcast groups ending up with top-four combinations, giving numerous broadcasters more retrans power without going through large-scale deals like Sinclair buying Tribune. The FCC is less likely to change the UHF discount than to address the ownership rules, and seems likely in coming months to OK simulcasting ATSC 3.0 signals, Cowen said: If the agency sticks to not preventing broadcasters from tying 3.0 carriage to 1.0 carriage, that could also make retrans talks -- including issues of buying equipment and devoting bandwidth to ATSC 3.0 channels -- with MVPDs more tense. Gallant said agency approval of Sinclair/Tribune without conditions limiting joint retrans seems likely, though that might not come this year.

The “pace of work” is accelerating on the CTA-CEB32 “family” of recommended ATSC 3.0 practices now that more of the next-generation broadcast system “becomes finalized,” wrote Brian Markwalter, CTA senior vice president-technology and research, in the September issue of ATSC’s monthly newsletter, The Standard. Once work on CTA-CEB32 is complete, it will consist of 11 parts plus an overview that will be “easily mapped to ATSC 3.0 standards,” said Markwalter, an ATSC board member. CTA-CEB32's components “will help close the loop between the broadcast side and receivers through industry agreed-upon guidance so that interoperability can be achieved in a mixed environment of independent broadcasters and TV manufacturers,” he said. CTA-CEB32.5 on ATSC 3.0 audio was the first component to be finalized, and recommended practices for the system’s logical layer (CEB32.3) and video (CEB32.4) are “approaching the ballot stage,” while that for the physical layer (CEB32.2) is being drafted, he said. Work begins next on system integration (CEB32.1), he said.

The FCC needs to study whether the improvements brought by ATSC 3.0 are worth rendering many existing TVs obsolete and disproportionately affecting low-income and minority households, blogged Rosa Mendoza, executive director of the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership on Thursday. “Without sufficient answers, low-income and minority families could be adversely affected and we could see the digital divide widen.” The FCC should require that broadcasters simulcast in both 1.0 and 3.0 during the transition, and give consumers enough time to switch to the new technology, HTTP said.

If the FCC implements Blue Alerts into the wireless emergency alert system, it should do so in a way that minimizes technical changes and system modifications, said T-Mobile and CTIA in reply comments in docket 15-94. The FCC should integrate the BLU code into the existing “imminent threat” alert class to avoid having to create a new standard, CTIA said. Giving the alerts a new message classification would be “a lengthy process,” T-Mobile said. The FCC shouldn’t look at ATSC 3.0 as a solution for mobile alerts, T-Mobile said: “There are significant technical challenges to integrating ATSC 3.0 technology into mobile devices, and the benefits represented are either overstated, are already provided through WEA, or are not readily achievable.”

Sinclair’s One Media met with FCC commissioners or their aides twice in the past week to press its argument for incorporating only the ATSC’s A/321 document on “System Discovery and Signaling,” not the A/322 standard on “Physical Layer Protocol,” into ATSC 3.0 rules, filings in docket 16-142 show. The FCC “should avoid over-regulation to permit innovation,” One Media told Commissioner Mike O’Rielly and aide Erin McGrath in Thursday meetings, said the company's latest ex parte notice, posted Friday. The commission need not mandate A/322 “to ensure universal compatibility,” it said. “Equipment manufacturers build to industry standards -- and service providers use those standards -- in the ordinary course without any government mandates,” it said. “Mandating A/322 would hamper innovation without any corresponding benefit.” One Media has support from NAB, PBS and Pearl TV in urging exclusion of A/322, while LG Electronics has been the strongest advocate for including it as a critical measure to help prevent receiver compatibility problems (see 1707120044). CTA recently urged the FCC to write final rules to “encourage” adoption of A/322, but in keeping with the voluntary, market-driven nature of the 3.0 transition, it stopped well short of seeking an A/322 requirement (see 1706090026).

The FCC should require broadcasters to simulcast content using the current standard during the ATSC 3.0 transition, said Verizon in a meeting with Chief Michelle Carey and other Media Bureau staff Wednesday, an ex parte filing said Friday in docket 16-142. “Just as broadcast TV stations should have the flexibility to choose whether and when to implement ATSC 3.0, other affected parties should similarly have the option of deciding whether and when to invest in new equipment to view and deploy ATSC 3.0, particularly consumers.” Rules governing simulcasting and quality of the 1.0 signal would be more efficient than other ways of easing the burden on MVPDs, and can have time limits for when 3.0 is more widespread, the telco-TV provider said. “The Commission can review and sunset any such restrictions as appropriate based on its evaluation of ATSC 3.0 penetration in the video market.” Broadcasters proposed simulcasting in initial filings on the transition, and have said repeatedly it should be allowed, not required (see 1707060060).

​The DVB Steering Board approved a new next-generation subtitling delivery specification based on the World Wide Web Consortium’s Timed Text Markup Language (TTML) platform, DVB said in a Monday announcement. The new spec complements “bitmap”-based subtitling, which has been in use for more than 20 years, DVB said. TTML subtitles are “increasingly being adopted” by standards bodies, including ATSC and SMPTE, it said. The new spec “will allow service providers to transition over time to a common TTML subtitle format for both broadcast and internet delivered services,” it said. TTML subtitling for ATSC 3.0 is defined in the A/343 document, approved as a final ATSC 3.0 standard in December (see 1707180040).

House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and two other House Democrats in top FCC oversight roles warned FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Monday they are concerned restoration of the UHF discount and other commission actions since his chairmanship began in January may indicate a “pattern of preferential treatment” for Sinclair. House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Mike Doyle, D-Pa., and House Commerce Oversight Subcommittee ranking member Diana DeGette, D-Colo., also signed Pallone’s letter to Pai. They also asked Pai whether his office engaged in “inappropriate coordination” with Sinclair, President Donald Trump’s administration and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. They cited the FCC process for evaluating Sinclair’s proposed buy of Tribune, commission’s earlier approval of Sinclair’s $240 million purchase of TV stations from Bonten Media (see 1707050042) and the ATSC 3.0 standard NPRM as pro-Sinclair actions. Sinclair owns 12 patents related to the standard. The lawmakers sought answers from Pai by Aug. 28 on a range of questions about the FCC’s Sinclair/Tribune evaluation process and the ATSC 3.0 NPRM, including whether “any White House official in the current Administration discussed Sinclair at all with you.” The lawmakers also sought any correspondence between Pai’s office and Sinclair. Pai said during a late July House Communications FCC oversight hearing that no one in the Trump administration contacted the commission about pending media transactions and the UHF discount reinstatement and other FCC actions are aimed at the whole market rather than any specific company (see 1707250059). "These FCC rulemakings apply to the entire broadcast industry, not just us," said Sinclair Senior Vice President-Legal Affairs Rebecca Hanson in a statement. The FCC didn't comment.