I care because ATSC 3.0 includes AC-4, a proprietary Dolby format. None of my software will play the audio from ATSC 3.0 over the air broadcasts for this reason.

ATSC 3.0 is a government standard for how public airwaves should be used. It strikes me as wrong that the government has basically mandated Dolby licensing for hardware manufacturers and software libraries.

That's a good counter-argument which I agree with. I was looking at the issue in terms of voluntary consumer behavior (visiting theaters, buying TV or hifi equipment) and industrial supply rather than public good considerations. Where limited resources are allocated by government as (ideally) neutral broker we should certainly prefer openness.

There is an argument for patent protection as innovation motivator, but lockup periods are more likely to lead to runaway market dominance due to preferential attachment. Where there's a monospony (like government as owner of spectrum) that's probably going to lead to negative outcomes.

Thanks for widening my perspective on that issue.

I’m kind of directly affected by this as a consumer, as I am a big user of Plex, but can no longer receive sound with my antenna television if I run it through Plex.

This is because ATSC3.0 requires Plex to secure licensing for AC-4 audio in order to process the sound, which they legally haven’t been able to do yet.

Unfortunately, my reception is significantly better via ATSC3.0, yet I’m left waiting and unable to utilize it.

https://forums.plex.tv/t/atsc3-0-broadcast-and-ac-4-sound/64...

It looks like there are some ffmpeg forks that include patches supporting AC-4 but they haven't been merged upstream yet. https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/8349

Not that it changes anything. Proprietary formats have no place in such government specifications. But possibly a relevant ffmpeg build could help you do what you wanted to.

ATSC 3.0 doesn’t mandate Dolby AC-4, it also supports MPEG-H. Both require licensing. The thing is, there is no equivalent patent-free technology available (object-based 3D audio).

Exactly. Which is why "I don't care" is a very shortsighted and terrible look on a standard that's at least royalty free.

Yeah, my point is you can’t blame ATSC 3.0 for making use of the existing standards. And it’s not too different from how a lot of mobile/wireless technology depends on patents.

Well of course ATSC 3 includes a new proprietary Dolby format, ATSC 1 got AC-3 as a mandatory audio format, too.

I'm not sure if ac-4 is mandatory, but it seems like it is? Kind of a big pain indeed.

Atsc mandates ac-3. Ac-3 audio is actually dolby-d. They just could not call it Dolby in the standard so they renamed it to ac3 instead.

Do you feel the same way about the EU forcing exertions to use USB C?

Dolby vision playback effectively doesn't work on PCs, so if you are a consumer that uses PCs, you have a reason to care.

Windows Movies & TV can play Dolby Vision if you install the HEVC and Dolby Vision extension from Microsoft Store.

Last I tried you couldn't even play 4k Blu Rays on PC. Has that changed?

MakeMKV can read them with LibreDrive firmware. Now if you are asking for a media-conglomerate approved way then no idea...

...and this is why I just stopped trying, heh. The industry really shot themselves in the foot there.

Infuse on mac can

Dolby vision is basically broken on Linux and not great on Windows.

From what I remember it basically does not work in any browser based setup - have to use Netflix apps or dedicated software?

I can't argue with that as I only know about their audio side.

HDR in general is non-existent on Linux.

Competition is always good for a consumer, especially here where right now you simply don't have a choice but to pay the rent to Dolby on every TV audio device.

C'mon, this is market capitalism 101

Luckily I'm not a capitalist and am not convinced my life will be improved by shaving costs down to nothing until there is only one supplier left standing. Fort that matter I'm not much of a consumer, I'm still using a 10 year old TV XD

What's weird to me is how google is selling this as a win for the public, when the marginal costs added by Dolby are so low. Even in the audio production space, Dolby stuff is a little expensive for an individual (surround sound plugins costing hundreds of dollars) but it's not a big overhead for a recording studio. Their product is quality and consistency at industrial prices and imho they deliver on this.

There isn't an underground of frustrated audio engineers dreaming of how theatrical sound could be so much better if it weren't for big D. Spatial audio rebels build quadrophonic sound systems for raves, but you didn't hear it from me.

How is one of the richest monopolistic companies in the world deciding to destroy a market segment "competition" that is "good for the consumer"?

So like Apple with their ATT? HN news user simping for Apple