TV licensing strikes again!

neilwoods

Moonraker is correct in what he says, but you may need a license if you watch pre recorded programs by someone else.

Part of the sale of any tv recieving equipment us that you must give your name and address, however you dont have to prove it is the right name & address.

You can have a set top box attached to your hifi and only recieve radio, and you dont need a license for it.

As for warrant to enter, the officer has to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that you have a working tv that is recieving, and witness it in action.

Allways refuse to sign anything, or even talk to them. Make sure tv is not visible through any window, and out of earshot of letterbox.

Or if you really want to. Send them a letter refusing them the right to visit your property.There is something an implied right of access, ie gives postman, milkman or callers the right to use your footpath, doorbell or letterbox without ur express permission. But if you write to them and tell them you have withdrawn there implied right of access. So if they were to knock on your door after this, then they are breaking the law.

Yogibear

it is a strange way they work a girl I know never had a licence for 10 years she said she put if off one year and just "forgot" about paying it again,anyway she was caught, was she cautioned,fined? not a bit of it didnt repay anything but was persuaded to set up a direct debit for future payments.

moonrakerz

neilwoods wrote: »

Moonraker is correct in what he says, but you may need a license if you watch pre recorded programs by someone else.

No you don't, you are not "watching or recording live TV" !

Alfie_E

moonrakerz wrote: »

neilwoods wrote: »

Moonraker is correct in what he says, but you may need a license if you watch pre recorded programs by someone else.

No you don't, you are not "watching or recording live TV" !

If you had your neighbour recording programs for you, and handing the recordings over to you soon after they had been made, the BBC and TVLA would certainly argue that that falls under “nearly live”, as they define it.

There’s certainly an interesting question as to what is live or nearly live TV, when it comes to faster technology, such as streaming across the Internet or other on-demand services. You’d have to concede that an Internet stream with a five or ten minute delay is pretty well “live”. But, with an on-demand service, when the initial broadcast ends, and the program drops into an archive, has it now become not live, or do you have to wait some more?

neilwoods

It has nothing to do whether it is live ot not. It is about copyright laws, under our copyrighting laws, it does say you are allowed to make a personal copy for yourself and your own personel use.

And there was me trying to argue moonrakers case, wont bother again. You could argue against yourself in a mirror and still lose. :rolleyes:

This is from them, that i quoted from

Can I watch a video of a TV broadcast without a licence?

This is where a bona fide non-licensed household borrows a video of a TV broadcast recorded elsewhere, on licensed equipment.

Non liquet. This situation is unclear. First, we are actually not aware of any interpretation of the law which allows the playback of recorded television material on non-licensed equipment.

However, there is an alternative view. TV licensing appears to make no distinction between pre-recorded commercial video and recorded TV broadcasts. On this basis, watching such videos as being discussed here may transgress no TV licencing laws. What a TV licensing inspector might make of a pile of such videos adjacent to a TV is a matter of conjecture.

Secondly, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 states that the recording of TV programmes should be for time-shift purposes; in other words, to view at a more convenient time. On this basis, viewing such brought-in material contravenes copyright laws.

How can a non-licensed household justify playing a recorded video of a TV programme for the purpose of viewing at a more convenient time, when clearly they cannot time shift, without receiving TV broadcasts? It is interesting to speculate whether watching such material in a non-licenced home with the person who recorded it is lawful in terms of copyright or not.

It is best avoided.

battybouncer

Errata wrote: »

That Gordon Brown, eh! Won't we be lucky to have a smart PM like him!

BattyBouncer............ please, please tell us how to save money by paying a fine instead of buying a TV licence. After all, this is a moneysaving site and we're all very keen to save money.

Easy! You only get a visit or get caught maybe once in every three or four years,the fine is only the price of a licence,after paying the fine they think that you will rush out and buy a licence but you don't.
The only reason I buy a licence is that I don't want to see my name in my local newspaper.

ckerrd

Using a TV or any other device to receive or record TV programmes (for example, a VCR, set-top box, DVD recorder or PC with a broadcast card) without a valid TV Licence is against the law and could lead to prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000, not to mention the embarrassment and hassle of a court appearance

Slightly more than the cost of the licence fee.

I know it says could but a bit of a risk if they do fine you £1k

Count_Dante

Most of the really good stuff you see on the BBC are co-productions with American TV companies, such as the Discovery Channel and HBO. Two notable such series are Planet Earth with David Attenborough (Discovery Channel) and Band of Brothers (HBO). These channels are obviously not financed by unwilling license payers.

Whilst advertising might be a non starter, I'm sure it would not be a major technological hurdle to make the BBC viewable only by willing subscription holders, especially with the new digital televisions. Those that do not want the BBC can do without it, and those that do can pay for it (must see who becomes Joseph!).

Part of my irritation with the BBC is due to the nasty letters I got from their agents (Capita), saying they would send the boys around to discuss my non ownership of a license - at a time when I did not own a TV. They sent a nastier letter after I got a TV and purchased a license.

battybouncer

ckerrd wrote: »

Using a TV or any other device to receive or record TV programmes (for example, a VCR, set-top box, DVD recorder or PC with a broadcast card) without a valid TV Licence is against the law and could lead to prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000, not to mention the embarrassment and hassle of a court appearance

Slightly more than the cost of the licence fee.

I know it says could but a bit of a risk if they do fine you £1k

About once a month my local newspaper lists everyone who were fined and it's never £1,000,each person gets a fine of something like £120.:rotfl:

battybouncer

Now that we are all going digital the BBC could scramble their channels then we would have the choice,those who are happy with the rubbish that they show can subscribe.