TV Licence rip off - beware!

Moneymaker

We'll soon ALL be paying a licence fee regardless of whether we watch any TV. It's already been proposed. No surprises because other countries already have this tax.

Cornucopia

There's a long way to go before we get to that. It'll also be a challenging bit of legislation to put in place which captures all genuine "TVs" and similar equipment.

I wonder which side of the line my 32inch monitor will sit?

Personally, I think retro-fitting this to the UK's communications environment will be too hard, and they will do something else.

VisionMan

Cornucopia wrote: »

There's a long way to go before we get to that. It'll also be a challenging bit of legislation to put in place which captures all genuine "TVs" and similar equipment.

I wonder which side of the line my 32inch monitor will sit?

Personally, I think retro-fitting this to the UK's communications environment will be too hard, and they will do something else.

It won't actually. You and I have different opinions on the TVL and I respect your opinion. But this is a move into the 21st century, as is the de-criminalisation of the TVL (Pah! outdated tosh).

I have always believed that anyone who consumes BBC TV content, whether live or catch up, should pay the TV license. So this is only a logical move, with the BBC iPlayer getting 10.7m hits a day. And being digital, checking if one has a TV license is actually very easy.

I am of the opinion that if one does not wish to pay the TV License, fine. So don't then consume BBC content, period. So I agree with the move to encapsulate the BBC iPlayer into the TVL. Though I agree its a controversial move, I think its a needed one.

[Deleted User]

VisionMan wrote: »

I agree with the move to encapsulate the BBC iPlayer into the TVL. Though I agree its a controversial move, I think its a needed one.

Although I tend to agree that this would be a good move, I can't agree that it'll ever be anything other than a proposal.

roddydogs

What about the "Pay monthly" con that so many fall for...........work it out its dearer.

sazaccount

I've not paid for a TVL in nearly 4 years, with the amount of streaming websites there's no need the content on the BBC isn't that interesting (to me anyway) but I can't see the issue on watching iplayer for catch up without a TVL if you go searching hard/easy enough you can find the episodes on other (maybe not legal) streaming sites. Either that or do what ITV, channel 4 and 5 on demands do and add advertisements??

I do agree though to end up only paying for 11 months as the OP pointed out is a bit sneaky!!!

Cornucopia

roddydogs wrote: »

What about the "Pay monthly" con that so many fall for...........work it out its dearer.

It isn't dearer (not for the TVL), it's just that you are required to pay half in advance so there is no benefit compared to those who pay annually.

Cornucopia

VisionMan wrote: »

It won't actually. You and I have different opinions on the TVL and I respect your opinion. But this is a move into the 21st century, as is the de-criminalisation of the TVL (Pah! outdated tosh).

I have always believed that anyone who consumes BBC TV content, whether live or catch up, should pay the TV license. So this is only a logical move, with the BBC iPlayer getting 10.7m hits a day. And being digital, checking if one has a TV license is actually very easy.

I can certainly see the logic of this. However, the law as it stands at the moment has a sense to it, that could be lost depending on the framing of the new law (and how the BBC enforces it).

Once you get past the headlines (some of which are clearly constructed/inspired by people with little knowledge of the technology) the detail is a little more challenging. The notion of "turning off the BBC signal to those with no licence" is clearly well into fantasy at the moment, for example.

(Some legislative proposals involve confiscation of equipment, which seems both more practical and more medieval).

Whilst requiring a licence number on sign-up to iPlayer is something that the BBC could/should do, making this water-tight whilst allowing for multiple devices on the same licence is a bit more of a challenge. What number of devices should be permitted? Should some devices always be exempt? These are practical questions that will determine how effective the regime is at keeping the lid on the BBC's cookie jar.

Similarly, the "all TVs" requirement: what is a "TV"? Is my phone a TV? What about my computer monitor? And does my computer monitor become a TV if I connect it using HDMI rather than RGB? Or is it a question of what I connect it to? And how will these questions be tested given that the equipment is inside my home? Again - practical questions that will determine the effectiveness and efficiency of any new law.

I am of the opinion that if one does not wish to pay the TV License, fine. So don't then consume BBC content, period. So I agree with the move to encapsulate the BBC iPlayer into the TVL. Though I agree its a controversial move, I think its a needed one.

The only issue with this is that the licence is not a BBC licence. Therefore all free-to-download content is available to those without a licence. The BBC has chosen to make this content free-to-download, presumably for the public good - if not that then perhaps it was a Trojan horse all along, waiting for the day when it was popular enough for the BBC to demand a change to the licence fee (moving from providing 100% of licencable content pre-1955, to two-thirds in the 70s, to maybe 30% now, and onto sub-1% if they get an Internet Licence).

Perhaps we should regard such gerrymandering and land-grabbing with the scorn it deserves?

roddydogs

Cornucopia wrote: »

It isn't dearer (not for the TVL), it's just that you are required to pay half in advance so there is no benefit compared to those who pay annually.

Ho Ho Ho, heres a great idea, you pay for your Licence in ADVANCE, Yeh.Right
Im amazed so many fall for it (even my OH).

gjchester

Cornucopia wrote: »

The notion of "turning off the BBC signal to those with no licence" is clearly well into fantasy at the moment, for example.

Sky seem to manage it.

There was a similar outcry when we went digital, Who would pay for new boxes, Well we all managed.

Putting in a requirement for a smart card to control subscription to Freeview/Freesat on all new boxes/tv's would be simple, if there a long change over period (3 to 5 years) then people will naturally migrate.

Its more complicated, more restrictive, and would cost more to administer and process, as you need a card per TV, but it's not in the realms of fantasy by any means, its a case of not doable yet, not it's not doable at all.

Cornucopia wrote: »

Whilst requiring a licence number on sign-up to iPlayer is something that the BBC could/should do, making this water-tight whilst allowing for multiple devices on the same licence is a bit more of a challenge

Sky and Virgin both do TV online catch up services, they use a username/password system tied to your account and allow a set number of devices to use it (3 I think), that could easily be done for iPlayer on tablets/mobile, after all you can only watch one device at once.