Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

wherebee

Television Licensing In The Uk - Question

Recommended Posts

I know there is a wealth of HPC knowledge on TV licensing. Here's one for you:

If I visit a friends house in the UK that does not have a license (no TV) but stream a sports channel onto my Ipad whilst in his front room using a 3G connections, that generates the need for a license. Got that. Crazy and mad, but understand thems the rules.

If I visit a friends house in the UK that does not have a license (no TV) but stream a sports channel onto my Ipad whilst in his garden using a 3G connections, does that generates the need for a license?

What if I sit in the local park and watch it, across the street from his place?

What if I sit in the local pub, that has an existing license but is not showing that game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the TV license site. http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology--devices-and-online-top8/

As long as the address where you live is licensed, you’re also covered to watch TV outside your home using any device powered solely by its own internal batteries. This includes your mobile phone, laptop and tablet.

I would say that because you are using a 3G connection (ie not anyone elses wi-fi wi-fi) then only you need a license wherever you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know there is a wealth of HPC knowledge on TV licensing. Here's one for you:

If I visit a friends house in the UK that does not have a license (no TV) but stream a sports channel onto my Ipad whilst in his front room using a 3G connections, that generates the need for a license. Got that. Crazy and mad, but understand thems the rules.

If I visit a friends house in the UK that does not have a license (no TV) but stream a sports channel onto my Ipad whilst in his garden using a 3G connections, does that generates the need for a license?

What if I sit in the local park and watch it, across the street from his place?

What if I sit in the local pub, that has an existing license but is not showing that game?

You need a license to watch live TV on your mobile device, be it at the park, your friends house or the pub, so long as the device is powered by internal batteries.

If you watch live TV on your mobile device, if your device is running on its battery, you need the license and the pub does not have to have one. If your device is plugged into the mains supply at your friends house or the boozer, the business/friend needs a license. The fact you may be watching a channel not shown in the pub/friends house is irrelevant.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology--devices-and-online-top8/

So, if you do not have a license but want to watch live action on your device, you must plug it into the mains to transfer the requirement for a license from you to the business or person whose place you are in.

Simples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right here is what I detest about the BBC.

More than one in ten of the criminal prosecutions in this country is for non compliance with the TV License law.

I used to spend a lot of time in Russia because of my job, and I found it shocking that everyone in Russia is a criminal purely because it's impossible to live your life without breaking some obscure law or other. When the state chooses to criminalise its citizens en masse in this way it becomes increasingly difficult to feel any allegiance or respect towards your country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a license to watch live TV on your mobile device, be it at the park, your friends house or the pub, so long as the device is powered by internal batteries.

If you watch live TV on your mobile device, if your device is running on its battery, you need the license and the pub does not have to have one. If your device is plugged into the mains supply at your friends house or the boozer, the business/friend needs a license. The fact you may be watching a channel not shown in the pub/friends house is irrelevant.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology--devices-and-online-top8/

So, if you do not have a license but want to watch live action on your device, you must plug it into the mains to transfer the requirement for a license from you to the business or person whose place you are in.

Simples.

Anybody else get the impression that they're making it up as they go along?

I know two people in RL who do not have a licence (legally).

One has a big monitor and watches iPlayer etc. and DVDs

The other just watches DVDs, the TV has no aerial

Admirable indeed but these are however far outnumbered by the many many people I know who subscribe to Sky or somesuch, even when in some cases they can't really afford it.

The absolutely dead simple solution to this licence fee issue is:

i) Scrap it in its current format

ii) Replace it by a 10% levy on pay TV

No collection problems, no taxing people just because they have a TV, payment only levied on those who choose to pay for TV anyway.

This would significantly reduce the BBC's income but no bad thing IMO as it would stop them pouring money into competing for market share (Eastenders, World Cup, Olympics, blockbuster films) and make them concentrate on the things they do well (several of the radio channels, science and nature, period drama, and the odd populist show likely to make commercial returns such as Top Gear).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody else get the impression that they're making it up as they go along?

I know two people in RL who do not have a licence (legally).

One has a big monitor and watches iPlayer etc. and DVDs

The other just watches DVDs, the TV has no aerial

Admirable indeed but these are however far outnumbered by the many many people I know who subscribe to Sky or somesuch, even when in some cases they can't really afford it.

The absolutely dead simple solution to this licence fee issue is:

i) Scrap it in its current format

ii) Replace it by a 10% levy on pay TV

No collection problems, no taxing people just because they have a TV, payment only levied on those who choose to pay for TV anyway.

This would significantly reduce the BBC's income but no bad thing IMO as it would stop them pouring money into competing for market share (Eastenders, World Cup, Olympics, blockbuster films) and make them concentrate on the things they do well (several of the radio channels, science and nature, period drama, and the odd populist show likely to make commercial returns such as Top Gear).

edit2- I think the law is creaking severly by being designed for an era where no portable TVs existed, and the very idea of hand-held devices streaming live TV was just a fantasy. You are right to say that it looks increasingly anachronistic and unworkable. I mean, has anyone ever been stopped watching TV outside on an iPad and been asked to prove they have a license? Not to my knowledge. The continued existence of the license relies on a tidal wave of misinformation from the Beeb, and a lot of complicity from other media outlets. Many people probably pay for a license without realising how close their viewing habits are to not needing one at all. The information is all clearly spelled out on the Beeb's TV Licensing website, for those that can be bothered to look at it.

Whether you own a TV with an aeriel is irrelevant, as has been done to death. I hold no TV license but I own a standard LCD flat TV. I was recently visited by TV licensing but it quickly became apparent that the BBC employee/representative didn't understand the most basic aspects of the law regarding this, so the conversation was short. In particular they took umbrage at the fact I flatly refused to give my name, or let them into my home, yet was happy to confirm that I owned a regular TV for the purposes of viewing DVDs. I wrote the TV licensing, giving my name as 'Legal occupier' to set them straight on a few points and to be fair the response I received was from someone who clearly knew the law.

It's not reams of stuff either, all the relevant points could be fitted on a side of A4, yet they still can't be assed ensuring their staff know the basics.

Might be something to do with the commission-based earnings setup which relies on selling licenses to punters to top up a miserly basic of £12k pa, out of which a car must be run too: edit mileage paid:

Sales+Officer+posted+by+Capita+TV+Licensing.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The absolutely dead simple solution to this licence fee issue is:

i) Scrap it in its current format

ii) Replace it by a 10% levy on pay TV

That's not simple enough, levies never are.

Just scrap the licence fee and make the BBC survive from advertising revenue, international programme sales, and commercial exploitation of its many franchises.

I worked in media for most of my life, I was brought up in Salford and Moss Side, so when the BBC announced they were moving a good part of their operations to Salford I had lots of worried BBC people calling me to find out what Salford was really like. I told them, get little Tarquin a stab vest and you'll be just fine. Fvck the lot of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a license to watch live TV on your mobile device, be it at the park, your friends house or the pub, so long as the device is powered by internal batteries.

If you watch live TV on your mobile device, if your device is running on its battery, you need the license and the pub does not have to have one. If your device is plugged into the mains supply at your friends house or the boozer, the business/friend needs a license. The fact you may be watching a channel not shown in the pub/friends house is irrelevant.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology--devices-and-online-top8/

So, if you do not have a license but want to watch live action on your device, you must plug it into the mains to transfer the requirement for a license from you to the business or person whose place you are in.

Simples.

Aha! Very informative.

So, as a visitor from outside the UK, when I am in the UK for a holiday I need to buy an annual license to use my ipad for live streaming - or plug it into a homeowner's plug when he has a license.

LOL! I am tempted to go stand outside the BBC on my next trip back, watching live sports from my TV provider in Hong Kong on my 3G connection and ask them to prosecute me....

what a bunch of ****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the state chooses to criminalise its citizens en masse in this way it becomes increasingly difficult to feel any allegiance or respect towards your country.

It's not as simple as the state deciding to criminalise in this case.

The TV licence in essentially its current form was introduced (for radio) in 1926. At that time, the proportion and demographic of the population who owned radios was roughly similar to the proportion of the population and demographic who had Internet access in their homes in 1995: a small number of wealthy geeks. Reith made an end run around the entire country, by predicting, correctly, that broadcasting would grow into a mass medium, and trying to regulate it up the wazoo right at the outset, when no-one was interested. It would be like an Internet licence having been introduced in 1995. No-one would have cared then, but there would be campaigning to abolish it now. The reason Cameron is now meeting so much resistance in his attempts to censor the Internet now is that it was invented and first implemented by libertarian capitalists, unlike broadcasting, which, in the UK, was invented and first implemented by a socialist, big government control freak.

Interestingly, there was a man by the name of John Grierson who, thankfully, has disappeared into the history books without trace, apart from in the classrooms of media studies courses at the University of Barnsley. He tried to do to the film industry what Reith did to broadcasting, was also Scottish and was also causing mischief around the same time. His problem was that by the 1930s, the film industry already existed, millions of people went to see Hollywood entertainment twice a week, and they were buggered if they were going to let that be pulled off the screen and replcaed with crappy Grierson propaganda movies about how wonderful life in the Soviet Union is. After being a darling of the left for about a decade, he disappeared off the map and eventually ended his days as a whisky-swilling film studies lecturer in an obscure Canadian university. Reith, on the other hand, imposed the BBC monolith on us, plus everything that went with it, from Jimmy Savile to Rastamouse,. We still haven't managed to undo the damage that he did, of which the TV licence is arguably the most potent symbol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be something to do with the commission-based earnings setup which relies on selling licenses to punters to top up a miserly basic of £12k pa, out of which a car must be run too: edit mileage paid:

ok so while top level directors at the BBC give each other massive pay-offs ( millions) for no good reason other than blatant theft of license payers money, they pay people 12K basic to increase revenue..... and these workers have to use their own vehicle?? It's so obvious the BBC has become redundant and needs dismantling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The absolutely dead simple solution to this licence fee issue is:

i) Scrap it in its current format

ii) Replace it by a 10% levy on pay TV

No collection problems, no taxing people just because they have a TV, payment only levied on those who choose to pay for TV anyway.

This would significantly reduce the BBC's income but no bad thing IMO as it would stop them pouring money into competing for market share (Eastenders, World Cup, Olympics, blockbuster films) and make them concentrate on the things they do well (several of the radio channels, science and nature, period drama, and the odd populist show likely to make commercial returns such as Top Gear).

I would go for this, obviously there would be howls of protest from the pay-tv subscribers but if you are moronic enough to pay for TV then I dont think you have much of an argument. BBC iplayer should be pay per view or subscription based and I would love them to open up more of their back catalogue to be viewed on this basis - I would pay for this.

The BBC has got bloated and all the recent payoffs that have been in the press show them up badly. We are getting crap like Homes under the Hammer and Bargain Hunt repeats when we should be getting something decent to watch - I would rather they showed a pile of old films to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it was originally concepted the BBC had no advertising at all.............(everything was subsidised from licence income)

............today it takes the piss! - cans of branded drinks, packets of branded consumer products etc............

the BBC should either survive on its income or close down

..........remember the licence was originally incepted well before commercial TV was even thought about..............

how much money (from the licence fee) does the minor channels get????????????? (or even ITV for that matter?)

It is completely unfair that the BBC continues to enjoy this cash cow at the detriment of all others...........

(I do have a licence by the way)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so while top level directors at the BBC give each other massive pay-offs ( millions) for no good reason other than blatant theft of license payers money, they pay people 12K basic to increase revenue..... and these workers have to use their own vehicle?? It's so obvious the BBC has become redundant and needs dismantling.

Don't forget the most important aspect-deliberately spreading misinformation and pressurising people into incriminating themselves in a travesty of 'justice'. Remember that the next time you hear You&Yours covering some consumer issue like con artist cold callers or something similar. Total hypocrites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know there is a wealth of HPC knowledge on TV licensing. Here's one for you:

If I visit a friends house in the UK that does not have a license (no TV) but stream a sports channel onto my Ipad whilst in his front room using a 3G connections, that generates the need for a license. Got that. Crazy and mad, but understand thems the rules.

If I visit a friends house in the UK that does not have a license (no TV) but stream a sports channel onto my Ipad whilst in his garden using a 3G connections, does that generates the need for a license?

What if I sit in the local park and watch it, across the street from his place?

What if I sit in the local pub, that has an existing license but is not showing that game?

If its streamed over the internet you dont need a liscence. A license is only needed if you are receiving broadcasted television signals. 3G is internet no?

Or have they changed the law recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If its streamed over the internet you dont need a liscence. A license is only needed if you are receiving broadcasted television signals. 3G is internet no?

Or have they changed the law recently.

I thought live streamed content was also included with broadcast material? It's only non-live internet content that isn't included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought live streamed content was also included with broadcast material? It's only non-live internet content that isn't included.

That is what I understand the law is - if you watch or record a live TV broadcast you need a license no matter how you do it.

However you do not need a license to watch anything on any of the catch-up channels.

The TV license in its current form has had its day, I do though support the BBC and hope we can have a source of television and radio that remains advert-free. Many of the local radio broadcasts and services for example would never be provided under a commercial operation.

The BBC need to get back to what they are supposed to be doing and providing quality television and radio. To do this they need to stop blowing all the money on management and top-star salaries - for example how much were they paying for Alan Hansen? I think he is great but I would watch Match of the Day if it was my mum doing the analysis as the main thing for me is to see the highlights of the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now there is a fine point of law, live streaming isn't actually live. Your system will buffer a certain amount of content before starting.

No matter how good your internet connection there is some delay. Has it been defined how much of a delay means you no longer need a licence ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now there is a fine point of law, live streaming isn't actually live. Your system will buffer a certain amount of content before starting.

No matter how good your internet connection there is some delay. Has it been defined how much of a delay means you no longer need a licence ?

Arg, these threads seem to always come down to people posting stuff like this-read the links. Live streaming = license. The law is quite clear regarding live streaming and the wording is such that it covers small delays due to encoding etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aha! Very informative.

So, as a visitor from outside the UK, when I am in the UK for a holiday I need to buy an annual license to use my ipad for live streaming - or plug it into a homeowner's plug when he has a license.

LOL! I am tempted to go stand outside the BBC on my next trip back, watching live sports from my TV provider in Hong Kong on my 3G connection and ask them to prosecute me....

what a bunch of ****

No one else think this is mental? This is a real situation, by the way.......I do bring my ipad and I will be watching streamed tv.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edit2- I think the law is creaking severly by being designed for an era where no portable TVs existed, and the very idea of hand-held devices streaming live TV was just a fantasy. You are right to say that it looks increasingly anachronistic and unworkable. I mean, has anyone ever been stopped watching TV outside on an iPad and been asked to prove they have a license? Not to my knowledge. The continued existence of the license relies on a tidal wave of misinformation from the Beeb, and a lot of complicity from other media outlets. Many people probably pay for a license without realising how close their viewing habits are to not needing one at all. The information is all clearly spelled out on the Beeb's TV Licensing website, for those that can be bothered to look at it.

Whether you own a TV with an aeriel is irrelevant, as has been done to death. I hold no TV license but I own a standard LCD flat TV. I was recently visited by TV licensing but it quickly became apparent that the BBC employee/representative didn't understand the most basic aspects of the law regarding this, so the conversation was short. In particular they took umbrage at the fact I flatly refused to give my name, or let them into my home, yet was happy to confirm that I owned a regular TV for the purposes of viewing DVDs. I wrote the TV licensing, giving my name as 'Legal occupier' to set them straight on a few points and to be fair the response I received was from someone who clearly knew the law.

It's not reams of stuff either, all the relevant points could be fitted on a side of A4, yet they still can't be assed ensuring their staff know the basics.

Might be something to do with the commission-based earnings setup which relies on selling licenses to punters to top up a miserly basic of £12k pa, out of which a car must be run too: edit mileage paid:

Sales+Officer+posted+by+Capita+TV+Licensing.png

First, I must say, an excellent post. The level of misinformation out there is unbelievable. I have been legally licence free for a while now and have found that around 99% of the people I've told have all assumed that I'm now breaking the law because, in their eyes, if you own a TV - you need a TV Licence. I find it especially among the older demongraphic (60+) as they are from a time when broadcast television was all that was available. A lot of younger people seemed to be more clued up on the rules but still subscribe to the outdated method because they think they'll go to court if they don't. I find it sad looking at the BBC now as it was once responsible for a lot of my favouriate programmes. But I guess, as the nanny state grows bigger, they want their state broadcaster to put out even more progaganda then ever before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   212 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.