Why do cable companies encrypt what was not encrypted in the past?

[Rich A]

Are we being ripped off by the cable companies?

<edit> Opps I think this belongs in another area - Moderator(s) please move if needed.

At present I subscribe to Cox Communications. They have promised to continue to supply me with analog service until 2012. That is all well and fine, but after seeing what's happening to other users with other cable companies, I'm now wondering what will happen in 2012 to my service?

Right now I receive both the basic and expanded channel line ups in analog. Neither are scrambled and I can receive them both with my cable ready analog TV. I've never owned or rented or needed any kind of set top decoder/tuner box!

What I fear is that they are going to encrypt the expanded basic tier when they finally switch to all digital. Which means I no longer can receive the "expanded" part of my basic/expanded without a decoder box.

Why? Why don't they just provide BOTH the basic tier AND the expanded Tier in clear QAM? They can (and are) doing it selectively with the old analog. Why can't they do that with digital?

I think there are a lot of us who are just interested in "basic/expanded" cable TV .. We don't want a ka-zillion music channels and don't want any premium (HBO etc) channels.

Right now (as an example) Here is what I'm am getting:
Basic Expanded ... (example chans 99 total ) In analog. No converter box needed ..

What I think I'll be forced to subscribe to is:
Basic Digital .. (local channels 12 total. PLUS some digital package including a lot of crap I don't want) at a more expensive price PLUS a required set top box = more $$

In the past I could receive both basic and expanded without needing a set top box.

Under the new (maybe?) system I will only be able to get the expanded part by renting a cable box.

Can anyone explain to me WHY they have to encrypt the expanded part of the digital package when those same programs offered in the past were not encrypted? Of course it might be the obvious .. ergo more money to them. Otherwise, I must be missing something ??

[Fonceur]

Whatever they provide in clear QAM, means that people can get it free and don't have to subscribe or can lower their subscription and still get it... They don't want to have to send a technician to install filters for channels that people are not paying for, they'd rather do it all from their authorization center...

[Rich A]

And that's my point. At present I'm paying extra for the expanded tier. And do NOT require any set top box to get it. Why can't they do the same thing for that analog tier but in digital?

I now get analog basic and analog expanded basic with no box required.
Why can't I get digital basic and digital expanded basic without a box?

Like if I had a digital QAM ready TV instead of my old analog tv.

Why do I need a converter box when all I want are the same channels I'm currently getting WITHOUT a box?

I wonder what would happen if I cancelled my analog expanded basic service? I'll bet that they are going to tell me I can't do that. BECAUSE of the fact that both basic and expanded basic are really not encrypted. And if I cancel the expanded they would have no way to stop me from receiving it.

Either that or they have some way of denying me the expanded tier unless I pay for it. And that's fine with me of course.

And if that is true, then why can't they do the same thing for digital ??

[Bigbird999]

Welcome to Canada, Rich

Basic analogue cable $29 includes major networks ch 1 - 75
Extended basic analogue +$20 = $49 includes space, history, TLC, A&E etc ch 76 - 140

Digital basic gets you all of the analogue channels with the digital equivalents for many/most of them. Plus a few more digital only channels (mostly crap). Cost is $51 plus rental of an SD digital receiver $4. If you have an QAM capable TV, you can tune all of these but there is no program guide. Next step up gives more "theme packs" with things like National Geographic, Animal Channel, Mystery, etc. just another $20 So now we are up to $75 and we haven't touched HD or premium/movie channels.

None of the HD/ premium channels are available in clear QAM. If you want HD you have to subscribe $6 and rent an HD receiver STB for $10 = $91. Then another HD DVR for $16 for the HD TV in the family room and you are up to $107/month....Before taxes. Satellite is a comparable price.

If you want to record HD TV to your PC you are stuck with paying all of the above, purchasing a HDPVR and using the "analogue hole" to capture HD from your cableco STB. For most of us, it just isn't worth the effort and expense.

For most Canadians, if you want to record HD TV this is the reality. No QAM HD, no access to OTA HD unless you live within sight of the CN tower (and or a 40 ft antenna mast), no competition to reduce prices.

It's simple, the cablecos and satcos want your money, analogue is going away because the FFC said so, so you end up paying more.

BB

[NickHark]

Originally Posted by Rich A

Can anyone explain to me WHY they have to encrypt the expanded part of the digital package when those same programs offered in the past were not encrypted? Of course it might be the obvious .. ergo more money to them. Otherwise, I must be missing something ??

Rich: I think some of us are hyper-ventilating over this issue.

I have yet to hear from someone who has actual knowledge of facts that the cablecos are going to start encrypting the expanded basic channels.

As you know the U.S. federal regulations require the cablecos to provide HD locals in clear QAM if the locals broadcast OTA HD. There does not appear to be a reason to change this.

I know here in the SF bay area, the locals spent big bucks moving antennas and gearing up for the analog/digital conversion. They must expect ATSC HD to be in play for a while

The rest of the channels are clear QAM in SD and are of good quality, so I don't see what all the hand-wringing is all about.

The cablecos are not losing significant amounts of money to make it a priority to prevent those few people who are not paying for expanded basic to block them somehow.

Do you see it differently?

[Fonceur]

Originally Posted by Bigbird999

If you have an QAM capable TV, you can tune all of these but there is no program guide.

And that's only the "lucky Canadians", most of us don't get any clear QAM channels besides the promo channels...

[Rich A]

Originally Posted by NickHark

Rich: I think some of us are hyper-ventilating over this issue.

I have yet to hear from someone who has actual knowledge of facts that the cablecos are going to start encrypting the expanded basic channels.

As you know the U.S. federal regulations require the cablecos to provide HD locals in clear QAM if the locals broadcast OTA HD. There does not appear to be a reason to change this.

I know here in the SF bay area, the locals spent big bucks moving antennas and gearing up for the analog/digital conversion. They must expect ATSC HD to be in play for a while

The rest of the channels are clear QAM in SD and are of good quality, so I don't see what all the hand-wringing is all about.

The cablecos are not losing significant amounts of money to make it a priority to prevent those few people who are not paying for expanded basic to block them somehow.

Do you see it differently?

I understand fully about the FCC requirement for cable co.s to carry any local OTA stations in their service area. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the rest of my service.

Right now I can get all the locals on Clear QAM. But the only way I can get the REST of my paid for package (when they drop the analog in 2012) will be to subscribe to a "new" digital package AND rent their cable box. So I can tell you from first hand experience, the expanded basic digital package MUST use their set top boxes.

Right now they already HAVE my basic and expanded basic in BOTH analog and digital. And the digital expanded is not available to me without a decoder box. My point is that I never had to use a box before. Their argument is that in order to get my expanded basic in digital I HAVE to use their box. Why can I receive analog expanded basic (which I am paying for of course) but can not receive the SAME thing in digital without an increased fee and a required rental box. Why can't they just have a clear qam digital expanded basic line up along with the required "local" broadcast stations in digital clear qam? And by the way. The "digital" equivalent of my analog expanded basic has a LOT more junk (like music channels and such) that I would have to pay a lot more money for, which is another argument they make for me having to pay more and rent their box.

[Bigbird999]

I have yet to hear from someone who has actual knowledge of facts that the cablecos are going to start encrypting the expanded basic channels.

As you know the U.S. federal regulations require the cablecos to provide HD locals in clear QAM if the locals broadcast OTA HD. There does not appear to be a reason to change this.

I think that this is begining to change http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...3_brier14.html

We've known since December that Comcast was switching channels 30 to 70 from analog to digital. This is forcing "expanded basic" customers to add Comcast converters to every TV and limiting the usefulness of VCRs and non-Comcast digital video recorders.

The company gives affected customers up to three converter devices. They're free — but don't provide the high-definition signals many customers had been receiving on some channels. For HD, you are supposed to rent a more expensive box.

There was a small loophole, but it's now closing.

Comcast has been transmitting the digital signals unencrypted. That means people with TVs that have built-in digital tuners haven't had to use the adapters yet. Some people with bare-bones $14 cable service (and a TV with a "QAM" tuner) have been getting expanded basic channels for free.

But not for long. Late last month, the FCC authorized Comcast to use the free converter devices as descramblers. That's a green light for the company to start encrypting signals, which it began doing a few weeks ago in Spokane. The rest of Washington will follow soon, meaning all expanded-basic customers will truly have to use converters soon.

"We're still on track to encrypt, definitely, by the end of the year," spokesman Steve Kipp said Friday.

Basically they are taking the stand that the free STBs provide the customer with access to the locals digital channels (not HD) and that everything else has to be subscribed to. I might be wrong, but I don't believe the FCC mandates locals in clear QAM, they just require that the customer can access them via basic cable (hence the free STB).

BB

[NickHark]

Originally Posted by Bigbird999

I think that this is begining to change http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...3_brier14.html


Basically they are taking the stand that the free STBs provide the customer with access to the locals digital channels (not HD) and that everything else has to be subscribed to. I might be wrong, but I don't believe the FCC mandates locals in clear QAM, they just require that the customer can access them via basic cable (hence the free STB).

BB

I'm not persuaded.

My Comcast switched last month from analog to digital; They offered the digital converter boxes or you could use your Comcast STB, which I declined. Specifically their offer was: use your STB for the TVs you have subscribed for, and/or we'll give you a digital converter for those that didn't use a STB.

One can check to see what they get by using their qam-tuner-equipped TV to see what chanels are available.

My system continues to hum right along. No analog, of course but all the expanded basic channels in digital (SD digital for the non-locals; and HD for the locals).

I think the cablecos love all this confusion; it sells more boxes.

Where am I wrong?

[jrandeck]

Nick,

I think the issue is that Comcast started the digital rollout in your area before they got the waiver to allow decryption on the converter boxes, so in order for those to work they need to broadcast all the basic channels in clear-QAM.

So far you're lucky, but Comcast wouldn't have gone through all the trouble to get the waiver from the FCC to allow encryption of the basic cable channels if they didn't intend to use it.

As for encrypting local stations, we'll have to wait and see.

[vidiot1985]

Originally Posted by jrandeck

Nick,

I think the issue is that Comcast started the digital rollout in your area before they got the waiver to allow decryption on the converter boxes, so in order for those to work they need to broadcast all the basic channels in clear-QAM.
...

My reading of that waiver thing was not that it allowed Comcast to encrypt stuff they're not allowed to encrypt (or rather require leased equipment to view) now, but rather that it allows them to do so in the future when various other regulations expire, without having to pull back all the "free" unsecured digital STBs and replace them with different, secured ones.

With the waiver, then can just use the remote security enable capability and do it en masse without stepping foot into your house (assuming you have the waiver-allowed hardware rather than the no-security-included boxes).

As for Rich's question about encrypting standard channels on digital channels, I guess like Comedy Central, they do it because they can and it makes their control over signal theft easier than it currently is.

I think someone told me that the current notch filter physical hardware blocking they use to keep basic customers and broadband-only customers from getting the analog standard channels don't work with the digital channels typically because they share frequency ranges with the broadband stuff.

I wish they'd just drop the unencrypted analog stuff, reuse those analog channels for digital, clear QAM channels and all their existing notch filters would still work, right? And folks who don't have QAM tuners in their TVs and needed the analog standard channels? Too bad! It's 2009 and "cable ready" means QAM. Those are the folks who should suffer with the security-capable, freebie digital STBs to convert clear QAM to analog for them. Let the rest of us who planned for the future (and paid more for it!) take advantage of our QAM tuners.

[ChefJoe]

Rich,
in case this bit of news missed you (seems to have been missed here at SnapStream forums), Cablevision (New York market) is filing to encrypt everything. I'm not in their market, but I am going to submit my comments on what this does to my DVR setup.

How to respond:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...-09-2094A1.pdf

Multichannel News

Cablevision asks FCC for a waiver to encrypt all Clear QAM channels
Cablevision asks FCC for a waiver to encrypt all Clear QAM channels

by Ben Drawbaugh posted Sep 24th 2009 at 7:25AM
Flying in the face of those who think that cable operators are allowed to encrypt every channel, Cablevision has petitioned the FCC for a waiver to do just that. Evidently it is argued that even the basic tier should encrypted to save money on truck rolls that are currently required to disconnect service. As usual, the FCC is requesting the comment of opposing views, so it's not to late to be heard. But it seems to us that Cablevision is going to have a hard time arguing to protect these channels in the clear, when it's the every same channels you can get for free with an antenna. Add in all the customers who brought home a new TV and just plugged it into the cable and did a channel scan, and you have yourselves a waiver we'd like to see denied.

[Rich A]

I hope that will ever happen. In short, way back when the Cable TV industry was being planned, I think the local OTA stations saw it as competition and something that might take viewers away from the OTA station viewing. There are a lot of "cable broadcasters", AMC, TMC, Discovery Channel, Disney, ESPN, CNN .. well you get the picture. Before Cable TV the only place you could get any television content was from the over the air broadcasters.

Back in the late 50's in the early evening the only viewing choice you had was "The Show of Shows" and others being broadcast by the networks OTA.

But then when cable came along with several dozen NEW stations not available over the air, suddenly the OTA stations were feeling a little threatened.

However not everyone could get all the OTA stations. Some were just not in the best reception area. Like behind a mountain, or in a low lying area. So the thought was, okay then, if we are going to allow this new "closed cable TV system" let's make it mandatory that they provide all the local over the air stations as part of their basic cable system. Now this was GOOD for the OTA stations. Now those people that were in bad receiving areas could sign up for cable TV and finally watch the local channels in their area. Sure the actual "air-time" is still going to be divided at any given time between the cable only stations and the cable/local OTA stations. But that was part of the compromise. The FCC sort of figured, we have to give those OTA stations something to even the playing field.

I think that is what you can read between the lines of all the legal stuff and FCC edicts. If they do allow a waiver for one cable company then they will be setting a precedent and will have to give any other cable co. the same deal. And the bottom line is that the OTA stations will no longer be viewable on cable unless you pay for more than the very basic line up. Which is going to really get the OTA stations upset. In other words, the cable companies will get more $$ just for showing the OTA stations.

I'm a little worried by what I read here with our Cox cable. While they are continuing to provide the local OTA stations in BOTH analog and clear QAM digital until at least 2012, I can see the handwriting on the wall. I notice in the new packages, the "basic" and "extended basic" are being combined into only one tier. After 2012, all that will be available as their entry-level package is going to be one that has the local OTA and minimum cable packages combined. In other words, there will be no "basic", and no free "Local station content". I wonder though if that is all moot. Does anyone know of any cable company that has a tier level that is ONLY local OTA? Or if so, will they let you subscribe to just that very basic level? (Not that anyone would want to I guess) <grin>

For me, I'm not looking for something for nothing. I'm perfectly happy with paying for what ever I'm subscribing to. My big gripe is that:

Today - I pay for and get my 99 channels on all my TVs and can record as many of them as I want with a multiple tuner DVR.

After 2012 (and I guess now for many other cable co's) I will have to rent and use a decoder box for any channel I want to record simultaneously. Ie six converter boxes to feed my six tuner DVR. JUST because all the stations will be encrypted.

Why not just fix a charge (like 50 bucks or something) for a new "basic" package that includes channels 2 thru 99 in clear qam? Then encrypt everything else?

As I have seen mentioned elsewhere some think it's too technically difficult to do. I don't understand it. I'm willing to pay for it ...

I don't receive any "premium" channels or Pay for View etc. Just the 80 some odd regular channels (what Cox calls their "limited basic" that is combined with their "expanded basic"). And that costs me 50 bucks a month. I'd gladly pay a reasonable extra amount of bucks to get JUST those channels in clear QAM. Yeah I know .. it's technically not possible. Or so I've been told.

[ChefJoe]

Rich A, it's greed. They want to lock down as much as they're legally allowed to upsell cable TV packages with premium content, be able to tune what packages you receive electronically to avoid any costs from rolling a truck (no costs to change service or disconnect deadbeats), and all while not developing and implementing a competitive True2Way cablecard interface. What pisses me off is that all the "free DTA" boxes passed out by Comcast output composite video and stereo sound. Use that DTA and you won't even get the local HD channels you are supposed to get for free... unless you use some A/B switch to bypass the DTA as needed. What happened to the simplicity of cable-ready TV ?

If I read your <grin> right, I guess you do know about how they're currently putting clearQAM right in the middle of all the analog channels, which is why signing up for the "OTA + public access" cable package (limited basic, about $12/month in my area) is incompatible with the old way of frequency-based tiers and traps. Not that they have to do it that way.

I too would love to get a true decryption box at my place, one that completely descrambled into clear QAM all channels going into the unit rather than selectively tuning into one at a time. To me, that sounds like precisely the sort of device that a competitive market would bring about.

[vidiot1985]

Originally Posted by ChefJoe

...To me, that sounds like precisely the sort of device that a competitive market would bring about.

It's a bit ironic that they make this kind of move in their New York City market where there is less competition (the small, digital satellite dishes being difficult to deploy in places with big apartment buildings).

But then it makes sense since rolling a truck in Manhattan is expensive (if you include only the parking tickets!) and slow.

Yeah, the centralized decrypter/channel-remapper that shoots out clear QAM to the rest of your house would be cool (and isn't that kinda what FiOS offers, at least for local channels?), though it doesn't address the cable company's theft of service concerns if you could trivially run a split to your neighbor's apartment/condo through the wall.

Anyway, the more the cable companies want to be like all the other pay TV providers that require individual decrypter boxes, the less reason folks outside of high rise canyons have to stay with cable.

It's like those parody commercials by DirecTV of the cable execs in the board room trying to figure out how to lure customers back--yeah, be more like satellite TV, except they choose the worst aspects of those services to emulate.