Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554

) In the Matter of ) ) Compatibility Between Cable Systems ) PP Docket No. 00-67 And Consumer Electronics Equipment ) ) )

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

COMMENTS OF THE MEDIA ACCESS GROUP AT THE WGBH EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION

The Media Access Group at Boston's public broadcaster, WGBH, hereby submits these comments in the above-captioned proceeding. Since 1971, WGBH has been a pioneer in making media accessible to people with disabilities through The Caption Center, the world's first television captioning agency; Descriptive Video Service®, the developer of access to television for people who are blind and visually impaired; and the CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media, an R&D facility for access to new media and new applications of accessible technology.

Introduction One of the unique promises of is its capacity to deliver advanced and expanded services for people with disabilities. However, there must be a guarantee of compatibility between digital television terrestrial, cable and consumer equipment if these benefits are to be realized in a consistent and ubiquitous manner.

The Commission can enhance the implementation of digital television closed caption standards by requiring cable television operators to deliver intact closed captioning data encoded in DTV transmissions according to EIA-708-B and ATSC documents

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 1 A/53 and A/65, to digital television receivers in a format that can be recovered and displayed meeting DTV decoder requirements soon to be adopted by the Commission.

Similarly, the Commission can enhance the implementation of video description services for people who are blind or visually impaired by requiring cable operators to deliver intact audio services encoded in DTV transmissions for this purpose according to ATSC documents A/52 and A/65, to digital television receivers in a format that can be recovered and displayed according to those same ATSC standards, or other rules adopted by the Commission.

Additionally, the Commission should consider that as broadband technologies develop, and traditional video, audio, data, telephone, and e-mail and Internet services continue to converge, compatible delivery of closed captioning and video description services across delivery systems will continue to be a critical issue. Indeed, caption and video description data and technologies will have increased value as accessibility tools for devices that present to the consumer a unified environment of streaming video and audio, on-screen text, graphics and content guides, and more traditional services. The Commission should ratify consumer expectations of accessibility to these new services and devices and require the same level of accessibility as the systems and services defined under Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Background In December 1996, the FCC formally adopted the basic blueprint that for more than three years has been used by broadcasters and equipment manufacturers in the design of DTV systems: the ATSC digital television standards.1

1 ATSC Document A/53, September 16, 1995, amended March 16, 2000, and others. Available at http://www.atsc.org/Standards/stan_rps.html

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 2 The ATSC standards represent years of consensus development across the professional broadcast and consumer electronics industries and are now in an active period of implementation and refinement. A recent estimate by the ATSC cites 132 working DTV stations on the air, reaching approximately 63% of total television households.2

Part of the implementation process is the need to provide compatibility in consumer receiving equipment for digital television signals originating from a number of sources, as this proceeding clearly acknowledges. This need is equally important to the successful delivery of closed captioning and video description services.

An important element of the ATSC standards is the method for digital television closed caption encoding and delivery. Developed through the EIA/CEA's R4.3 Television Data Systems Subcommittee, this standard is documented as EIA-708-B, a result of a lengthy period of cross-industry research, development, peer review and due process. The initial EIA-708 standard was balloted and accepted by the EIA/CEA in July 1997, and refined through practical implementation as the first DTV stations went on the air. The current document, EIA-708-B, reflects those refinements and is the basis for systems now delivering captioning services in working DTV stations across the country. It has also been adopted as the basis for other industry technical standards, specifically a caption encoding interface adopted by the Society of Motion Picture and television Engineers (SMPTE) in December 1999.3

Another significant development for accessibility is the digital television audio compression standard, ATSC document A/52.4 This allows multiple audio services to be included in a single program service, including one category specifically designated for blind and visually impaired audiences. It expands the possibilities for

2 See http://www.atsc.org 3 SMPTE 333M, "DTV Closed Caption Data Server Serial Interface”, December 1999. See http://www.smpte.org/standards 4 Also available at http://www.atsc.org/Standards/stan_rps.html

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 3 simultaneous video description and language services, not currently feasible under the existing analog broadcast technology.

A third area of the ATSC standards critical to the successful delivery of caption and description services is ATSC document A/65, the "Program and System Information Protocol", or "PSIP."5 This standard specifies the data describing the various features and services included in a DTV program (sometimes referred to as "metadata"), and will be used by routers, switchers and consumer receivers to transmit to and receive programs in the home. It is also a critical element in the creation of electronic program guides that will tell consumers exactly what's on and when. Successful delivery of caption and description services will depend on consistent and compatible delivery of these "announcements" across the various systems bringing DTV signals into the home.

The FCC should provide clear guidance and direction to harmonize these various standards across terrestrial and cable systems which will:

1. Assure the implementation of digital television closed caption standards by requiring cable television operators to deliver intact closed captioning data encoded in DTV transmissions according to EIA-708-B and ATSC documents A/53 and A/65, to digital television receivers in a format that can be recovered and displayed meeting DTV decoder requirements adopted by the Commission, and

2. Assure the implementation of video description services for people who are blind or visually impaired by requiring cable operators to deliver intact audio services encoded in DTV transmissions for this purpose according to ATSC documents A/52 and A/65, to digital television

5 ATSC Document A/65, “PSIP.” Also at http://www.atsc.org/standards

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 4 receivers in a format that can be recovered and displayed according to those same ATSC standards, or other rules adopted by the Commission.

Cable Standards Today Central to the DTV closed-caption cable compatibility issue is the fact that current cable television standards are based on earlier, NTSC caption standards. Most current implementations of closed captioning in cable systems utilizing digital compression technology depend on either the DVS-053 or the DVS-157 standards of the Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers.6 These require mapping of analog EIA-608 caption data into a different method for transmission, then decoding that data in a set-top box and remapping them into the EIA-608 format on line 21 of the VBI for decode and display.

Currently, neither DVS-053 nor DVS-157 support the expanded data capacity of the industry-adopted standard for DTV closed captioning, EIA-708-B.

While there are indications that cable DTV technology can support EIA-708-B, there is clear resistance to supporting anything beyond the limited data capacity of the analog caption standard, as evidenced in the comments of Motorola, Inc. in another current proceeding.7

These comments and the OpenCable documents cited below should be of concern to those who seek compatibility of closed caption services across broadcast, cable and consumer systems and devices.

The recently released OpenCable specifications for set-top boxes seem to require support for the minimum receiver requirements outlined in EIA-708-B: "All set-top terminals delivered after December 31, 2000 shall process the Digital Television (DTV) Closed Captioning information, when available in

6 See http://www.opencable.com 7 Comments of Motorola, Inc., In the Matter of the Review of the Commission's Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, MM Docket No. 00-39, May 17, 2000.

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 5 the MPEG-2 Picture User Data, as specified in EIA-708-B, section 9 and delivered according to SCTE-DVS053r6 or SCTE-DVS157r1 on a program-by- program basis." 8

This seems to be a clear recognition by the cable industry's leading research and development organization of the need to have interoperability between broadcast and cable digital television captioning systems.

Yet the companion OpenCable document for Network Interface Specification only requires support for EIA-608 caption data, and is silent on EIA-708-B, except to say, "Digital Television Closed Captioning information (DTVCC), when available, will be provided in a manner to be determined following the completion of current FCC rulemaking.9"

This would seem to indicate that specific action by the FCC is required in this matter if compatibility is to be achieved.

8 CFR-OCS-UDC-INT02-000419, " OpenCable Set-top Terminal Functional Requirements for Uni-Directional Cable", April 19, 2000, Sec. 7.2.5; and CFR-OCS-BDC-INT02-000418, "OpenCable Set- top Terminal Functional Requirements for Bi-Directional Cable," April 18, 2000, Sec. 7.2.5. Available at http://www.opencable.com/public_docs.html 9 OCI-N Cable Network Interface Specification, INT02 Interim Document, March 14, 2000, Sec. 5.8. Available at http://www.opencable.com/public_docs.html

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 6 Relation of this Topic to Section 255 The Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking10 regarding section 255 of the Telecommunications Act11 provided opportunities for comments and eventual regulations for assuring access to telecommunications for people with disabilities. An important aspect of those proceedings attempted to define a clear line distinguishing telecommunications services from "enhanced" or "information" services, the latter two deemed not falling under the regulatory umbrella of the Commission's rules. In the Further Notice of Inquiry attached to its Report and Order implementing section 255 rules, the Commission stated, We must ensure that the disability community is not denied access to innovative new technologies, for example Internet and computer-based services, that may become complements to, or even replacements for, today's telecommunications services and equipment.12

In particular, the Commission inquired into Internet telephony and computer-based equipment that replicates telecommunications functionality and "the extent to which government regulation will be necessary to ensure accessibility of communications technology in the future."13

Comments provided to that Notice of Inquiry by the Trace Research and Development Center at the University of Wisconsin in partnership with Gallaudet University made a compelling case as to why such emerging services should be treated the same as "plain old telephone service." Those comments also clearly pointed to potential problems if new telecommunications services are not made fully accessible and indicated benefits to people with disabilities as those new services are made widely available.

10 See Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No. 96-98, 64 FR 63235 (Nov. 19, 1999). 11 47 U.S.C. §255. 12 WT Docket No. 96-198, REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF INQUIRY, Adopted: July 14, 1999; Released: September 29, 1999, Sec. G. I. 173. 13 Ibid., sec. 176.

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 7 In their comments, Trace/Gallaudet:14 said that, classifying computer based telephony separately from other telephony will not work – given the current trends in computer, information appliance and telecommunication product design and integration.

Those comments pointed to known barriers in particular with the use of Internet telephony by people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, such as TTY garbling and lack of intelligible speech. However, if these technologies are made fully accessible, the same population will be well-served by video telephony for digital telecommunications conversations which will enable clear and intelligible lip- reading, sign language and captioning of conference calls.

For people who are blind or visually impaired, Trace/Gallaudet warned that, "newer phones are increasingly using techniques such as 'soft buttons' and touchscreens," that are significant barriers. Compatibility with assistive technology is also a great concern when examining the use of IP telephony by people with disabilities.

In its comments on the same proceeding, the American Foundation for the Blind also urged the Commission to assure through its regulations the accessibility of text- based and computer-based telecommunications services.

When and if the cable and broadcast industries begin to use their digital data transmission capabilities to provide telecommunications services to their customers, digital television set-top boxes and other receivers of digital and convergent media will become "customer premises equipment (CPE)" as defined in the Telecommunications Act and should be considered subject to the provisions of section 255 and the Commission's existing and future Reports and Orders regarding that section's provisions.

14 Trace/Gallaudet Comments to Docket No. 96-198 Further Notice of Inquiry In The Matter of Implementation of Section 255 and 251 of the Communications Act of 1996.

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 8 Conclusion The Commission has appropriately raised important issues regarding outstanding issues in the development of new programming and other digital services now or soon to be available over cable television systems. Consumer acceptance of these new services requires cooperation and compatibility among content providers, transmitters, distributors and reception equipment. The successes over the past decade in assuring equal access to information and entertainment by people with disabilities are at risk due to non-standard approaches to the delivery of such services as closed captioning and video description. The Commission must clearly and definitively support those widely accepted or soon-to-be-agreed-upon standards which will assure compatibility between digital television terrestrial, cable and consumer equipment if equal access for people with disabilities is to be realized in a consistent and ubiquitous manner.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Larry Goldberg

Larry Goldberg, Director Gerry Field, DTV Access Project Manager

Media Access Group WGBH Educational Foundation 125 Western Ave. Boston, MA 02134 e-mail: [email protected]

617-300-3400 (voice) 617-300-1035 (Fax) 617-300-2489 (TTY)

May 24, 2000

WGBH Comments, PP Docket No. 00-67 page 9