'Do you believe in the BBC licence fee?' poll discussion

vokesey

lucylucky wrote: »

The original point was made about needing a licence to own a TV - clearly you do not.

As TVL have no automatic right of entry into anyone's home it is up to them to prove that a person is watching live TV without a licence. Not the other way round. As games consoles can use iplayer to watch live broadcasts I cannot see how it is a "joke"

The "joke" is the supposition that "every" games console has the capability to do that. And that "every" person that owns one has actually downloaded said player. I can't speak for everyone here obviously, but i use mine for games, and i use sky for tv. Not my console, nor my imac nor either of our mac books. Oh and not my mobile either.
Further more it is a joke as it would appear the bbc spends more time trying to snare people on all possible fronts. Maybe we wouldn't be so fussed if they only put half that effort into the programmes.

vokesey

lucylucky wrote: »

Because it is part of what he BBC does?
You can watch programmes on the internet?
Because you would need to bring back the radio licence?



Anywhoooo.

Some nice gentle posts on here on both sides, if you want some real vitriol and conspiracy theories read the comments after this interesting article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/7889470/The-real-rate-of-BBC-licence-fee-evasion-is-shocking.html

I thought the tv licence used to also cover radio?

lucylucky

vokesey wrote: »

I thought the tv licence used to also cover radio?

It still does, in the sense that the money that the BBC receives is spent on radio as well as TV, and other things.

lucylucky

vokesey wrote: »

The "joke" is the supposition that "every" games console has the capability to do that. And that "every" person that owns one has actually downloaded said player. I can't speak for everyone here obviously, but i use mine for games, and i use sky for tv. Not my console, nor my imac nor either of our mac books. Oh and not my mobile either.
Further more it is a joke as it would appear the bbc spends more time trying to snare people on all possible fronts. Maybe we wouldn't be so fussed if they only put half that effort into the programmes.

The point is though that "some" mobiles and games consoles are capable of being used to watch live TV, so if you use one to do so then you are required to purchase a licence.

There is no joke or supposition.

vokesey

lucylucky wrote: »

It still does, in the sense that the money that the BBC receives is spent on radio as well as TV, and other things.

So you don't need it for radio anymore then?

Swan_2

vokesey wrote: »

So you don't need it for radio anymore then?

the radio licence was abolished in 1971

vokesey

lucylucky wrote: »

The point is though that "some" mobiles and games consoles are capable of being used to watch live TV, so if you use one to do so then you are required to purchase a licence.

There is no joke or supposition.

I think you're getting pedantic again. OK, i'll change joke to it's ridiculous! How can they possibly hope to police such things? so many people in this country dodge so many things. Even with vans etc (which a previous post rendered either ineffective or non existent.) Is there really any way to say for sure who is and isn't watching "live". Which in essence brings it back to fairness. Are those of us that are obeying the law paying for those that aren't? But then, i think that can stretch into far more important issues than the tv licence.

lucylucky

vokesey wrote: »

I think you're getting pedantic again. OK, i'll change joke to it's ridiculous! How can they possibly hope to police such things? so many people in this country dodge so many things. Even with vans etc (which a previous post rendered either ineffective or non existent.) Is there really any way to say for sure who is and isn't watching "live". Which in essence brings it back to fairness. Are those of us that are obeying the law paying for those that aren't? But then, i think that can stretch into far more important issues than the tv licence.

Sorry if you think I am being pedantic I am only trying to explain the situation in respect of TV licensing as it currently stands.

If you want to open out the debate into "fairness" and the legal system then I think you should be looking at starting a different thread.

vokesey

lucylucky wrote: »

Sorry if you think I am being pedantic I am only trying to explain the situation in respect of TV licensing as it currently stands.

If you want to open out the debate into "fairness" and the legal system then I think you should be looking at starting a different thread.

Why the need for a new thread? This is about wether or not people are happy that they pay for a service they have no control over, and the reasons why. It would least very long if no one offered an explanation as to why they are either in agreement or disagreement with it. And one of my issues with it is that not every one that uses the service is paying for it. Which has been clearly pointed out as illegal, and also unfair.

I accept it is practically impossible to police in it's current format. But in a subscription format, much easier.

rapido

. .