[opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- From: Eory Frank-p22212 <Frank.Eory@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:24:23 -0700
From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:02:07 -0700
>So, were the decision made to adopt DVB in the U.S., there might be some
>advantages in the modulation model. Indeed, I was talking a few months back
>with a high-ranking engineering executive at CBS, someone who is a lurker on
>this list, and he admitted that there are some advantages in COFDM
>modulation over 8-VSB. He said that he would never say such a thing
>publicly, but we were "among friends."
There are many such individuals who feel the same way but "would never say such
a thing publicly."
>However, adopting DVB in the U.S. would, absent a WHOLESALE revision of the
>DVB-SI spec, result in U.S. television stations becoming passive
>retransmitters of network programming. That might work in Europe, but in
>the U.S., Canada and Mexico, local stations are federal/state constructs:
>most of the programming is created elsewhere, but localism is an important
>component.
IIRC, nobody every seriously proposed "adopting DVB in the U.S." The debate was
strictly about the modulation. In principle, the DVB-T modulation scheme or
even a uniquely U.S. COFDM scheme could have been incorporated into the ATSC
standards in addition to or in place of the 8-VSB modulation scheme. Nothing
else (PSIP, Table 3, etc.) need have changed.
>And, what's really at play in the modulation wars -- even going back to the
>1920's -- is patents, IP and licensing. I know I'm not the only person on
>this list who knows this, but I'm the only one who talks publicly about
>THAT.
You are absolutely correct, and you are the only one on this list who has
talked publicly about THAT. The IP licensing cost of an ATSC receiver/decoder
will soon exceed the silicon + software cost, and a chunk of that will go to
LGE for the 8-VSB patents. We have discussed this on OpenDTV many times in the
past, including some news articles that put a dollar figure on the IP windfall
that LGE expects from the ATSC tuner mandate.
-- Frank
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400
- » [opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400