TV License dilemma

b33r

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

The Legislation.

"(5)Subsection (1) is not contravened by anything done in the course of the business of a dealer in television receivers solely for one or more of the following purposes—
(a)installing a television receiver on delivery;
(b)demonstrating, testing or repairing a television receiver."

Interesting, I hadn't actually ever read there was as exemption for TV dealers/repairs however it still wouldn't stop anybody setting up a TV (or a device capable or receiving a tv signal) as that section you've quoted wouldn't apply unless the device was then used to watch or record live TV.

By your understanding of the law one would need a TV license to build a computer which I think even you may agree would be crackers.

Interesting that a TV dealer/repair could then watch or record live tv and not be breaking the law though, TIL.

Kurtis_Blue

b33r wrote: »

Interesting, I hadn't actually ever read there was as exemption for TV dealers/repairs however it still wouldn't stop anybody setting up a TV (or a device capable or receiving a tv signal) as that section you've quoted wouldn't apply unless the device was then used to watch or record live TV.

By your understanding of the law one would need a TV license to build a computer which I think even you may agree would be crackers.

Interesting that a TV dealer/repair could then watch or record live tv and not be breaking the law though, TIL.

This is the issue, its not my understanding of the law, its not an interpretation. Its the way it stands at the present, hence the need and plans for it to be changed.

If you install TV receiver you need a licence.

Obviously (hopefully) in court for you to argue a PC with a million other genuine uses is not TV receiving equipment would be a pretty easy case to win, hence it wouldn't get there. I hope.

For you to argue the same with a TV plugged into a TV aerial and tuned in to all freeview channels or as in the case we were discussing connected to a Sky stb with live TV subscription would be a more difficult case that this is not installed TV receiving equipment.

cajef

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

It doesn't specifically state that you only require one if you watch or record live TV.

If you believe it does please show me where.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one?WT.ac=home_plt_check

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/how-to-tell-us-you-dont-watch-tv-top12

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

If you install TV receiver you need a licence.

You keep insisting you are correct when you are wrong, despite what everyone else in the thread is telling you.

No you do NOT, you only need a licence if you install a TV receiver to watch or recorded broadcasts as they are being transmitted live, you do not need a licence if you buy and install a TV receiver to watch catch up or DVD's etc. as is explicitly explained on the TV licence website.

Kurtis_Blue

cajef wrote: »

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one?WT.ac=home_plt_check

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/how-to-tell-us-you-dont-watch-tv-top12


You keep insisting you are correct when you are wrong, despite what everyone else in the thread is telling you.

No you do NOT, you only need a licence if you install a TV receiver to watch or recorded broadcasts as they are being transmitted live, you do not need a licence if you buy and install a TV receiver to watch catch up or DVD's etc. as is explicitly explained on the TV licence website.

I have simply have shown you many times the actual legislation that states in clear English you need a TV licence to install a TV receiver. That cannot be debated shirley?

Indeed TVL have taken that to mean a TV monitor connected to a DVD player etc.. (and not a Sky stb as per this discussion) is not a TV receiver and are not collecting licence fees for them.
I would agree, makes a lot of sense.

Doesn't change the legislation.

Kurtis_Blue

cajef wrote: »

In this you are quite correct so I suggest you also stop giving dubious advice to people about the need for a TV licence.

Wouldn't dream of it, in fact my first post explained that very clearly.

almillar

the installation alone is enough.

It's not Kurtis. They used to ask you for your address when you bought equipment, but they don't have to any more. It's perfectly acceptable to install a Sky box or a Freeview box solely to listen to radio, and you don't need a licence. For the moment, you could also use iPlayer etc, but NOT view or record live (as broadcast) TV.

Kurtis_Blue

almillar wrote: »

It's not Kurtis. They used to ask you for your address when you bought equipment, but they don't have to any more. It's perfectly acceptable to install a Sky box or a Freeview box solely to listen to radio, and you don't need a licence. For the moment, you could also use iPlayer etc, but NOT view or record live (as broadcast) TV.

Well we know the legislation states it is an offence to install TV receiving equipment without a TVL.

Do you have any links or documents that show this legislation has been changed?

silverwhistle

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

I have simply have shown you many times the actual legislation that states in clear English you need a TV licence to install a TV receiver. That cannot be debated shirley?

If all legislation could never be argued then many lawyers would be out of a job.

But to return to 364 which you cut and pasted at length, it says 'installation and use'. As you say yourself, very clear. The use of a specific conjunction, in this case 'and' instead of 'or' gives it a different meaning. Others have pointed out that TVL's own web site says that only watching/recording live broadcasts requires a licence.
In the face of this I'm wondering why you so persistently argue the opposite?

Kurtis_Blue

silverwhistle wrote: »

If all legislation could never be argued then many lawyers would be out of a job.

But to return to 364 which you cut and pasted at length, it says 'installation and use'. As you say yourself, very clear. The use of a specific conjunction, in this case 'and' instead of 'or' gives it a different meaning. Others have pointed out that TVL's own web site says that only watching/recording live broadcasts requires a licence.
In the face of this I'm wondering why you so persistently argue the opposite?

Section 364 relates to the changes BBC can make to the TVL requirements.

The section of legislation that relates to who requires a TVL states, as you have seen, Install or use TV receiving equipment.

The links I have seen here from the TVL website, that certainly donot change legislation, have all stated "A TV Licence is a legal permission to install or use television receiving equipment "

Such as this link provided earlier. http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16
That clearlt lays out the legal basis for TVL.

Or this one:

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ42

So I am am not arguing the opposite I am providing simple facts.

The TVL website and current legislation both clearly say you need a TV licence to install OR use.

So do you have any more current legislation that supersedes the communications act with regards the TVL?

cajef

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

The TVL website and current legislation both clearly say you need a TV licence to install OR use.

You conveniently missed the last bit off

Section 363 of the Communications Act 2003 makes it an offence to install or use a television receiver to watch or record any television programmes as they’re being shown on television without a TV Licence.

Where does it stipulate that you need a licence if you install a TV if you do not watch broadcasts as they are being shown on television.