TV License Requirement Question

Retrogamer

.Hello all,

I currently share a house with someone and although i never watch live TV, the house is covered by a TV license as my flat mate does.
I'm about to move into a house of my own and wondered if i need a TV license, but it's a little bit more tricky than it might seem.

From my reading it states i need a TV license if "i currently watch live TV as it's being broadcast"
This is something i never do and haven't done for about 7 years give or take.

However...
I do have a Now TV subscription and as part of that subscription, it gives me access to watch live TV channels as they're being broadcast.
When i move out, i plan to only watch on demand stuff so first thoughts are, i shouldn't need a TV license.
However i've heard about people being prosecuted before, because even though there was no evidence they were watching live TV as it was being broadcast, they had the means to do so and that was enough.

It will be an upstairs flat where they won't have any ability to see through my windows etc and i have no intention of letting any visitors from TVL in, unless i'm forced to do so.
Although strictly speaking i shouldn't require a license, is it still better to get one for a hassle / trouble free life in case i end up prosecuted for having the ability to watch live TV?

wymondham

So long as you don't actually watch any live TV then you're fine being licence free regardless of the fact you could actually receive it (via NOW TV).

Farway

Retrogamer said:

. plan to only watch on demand stuff so first thoughts are, i shouldn't need a TV license.

Just to be clear.

Watching the BBC iplayer requires a TV licence. The ITV hubs do not

Recording from live broadcast TV, including commercial channels,  also requires a licence

There's a thread somewhere on here about the legal ins & outs

Retrogamer

Farway said:

Retrogamer said:

. plan to only watch on demand stuff so first thoughts are, i shouldn't need a TV license.

Just to be clear.

Watching the BBC iplayer requires a TV licence. The ITV hubs do not

Recording from live broadcast TV, including commercial channels,  also requires a licence

There's a thread somewhere on here about the legal ins & outs

Thanks. All fine there as i haven't used iPlayer in years as well and no plans to.

pphillips

The reason people got prosecuted  in the past was because they had a "TV receiver", meaning that their tv was connected to an aerial, satellite dish or cable tv. The legislation did not require proof that they actually watched live TV as the fact they had a TV receiver was sufficient for a conviction.

Retrogamer

pphillips said:

The reason people got prosecuted  in the past was because they had a "TV receiver", meaning that their tv was connected to an aerial, satellite dish or cable tv. The legislation did not require proof that they actually watched live TV as the fact they had a TV receiver was sufficient for a conviction.

This is part of my concern.
I'll be using a Now TV Box, that connects to the internet. It won't have an aerial connected to it, but it can still receive live broadcasts by simply flicking to the live TV service part of it, which is included with the subscription, but i never use it. I just use it for on demand TV shows and movies via the Now TV app that is also accessed via the same box.

Cornucopia

TV Licensing has had to accept that people with phones, tablets, and PCs are just a couple of clicks away from viewing TV broadcast streams and/or iPlayer.   They do not prosecute people for having phones, tablets and PCs that have not been used to access TV broadcasts or iPlayer, as that would be ridiculous.   

With devices like the Now TV hardware, the same principle applies.

I have exactly the same configuration - a Now TV box + TV with no aerial or satellite connection.   I'm confident that it does not require a TV Licence as long as I do not access concurrent streams of TV channels.   I have deleted iPlayer from the box so there is no possibility of accessing it.

Bear in mind that it does seem to be the case (based on examining a lot of TV Licensing communications) that they can and do create badly constructed, obfuscated comms materials presumably because they are either ambivalent about public understanding or actively seeking to undermine it.   Either way, it's not right that the Public should fear that their freedoms are less than they are or their obligations to TV Licensing are greater than they are.

pphillips

Retrogamer said:

pphillips said:

The reason people got prosecuted  in the past was because they had a "TV receiver", meaning that their tv was connected to an aerial, satellite dish or cable tv. The legislation did not require proof that they actually watched live TV as the fact they had a TV receiver was sufficient for a conviction.

This is part of my concern.
I'll be using a Now TV Box, that connects to the internet. It won't have an aerial connected to it, but it can still receive live broadcasts by simply flicking to the live TV service part of it, which is included with the subscription, but i never use it. I just use it for on demand TV shows and movies via the Now TV app that is also accessed via the same box.

There's no need to be concerned as you don't have a "TV receiver" if your TV is not connected to an aerial, satellite dish or cable TV system. It's fine to use Now TV for watching shows on demand, even if the device is connected to your TV. People might feel safer if streaming devices came with a setting that removed all live TV and blocked access to BBC iPlayer. However, as long as you can exercise self control, it's not a necessity for staying legally license free.

nineropes

Is there anyone else out there who thinks that "britbox" should be included in the licence fee as we have already paid for the content, in my case over 45 years paying the licence fee

pphillips

nineropes said:

Is there anyone else out there who thinks that "britbox" should be included in the licence fee as we have already paid for the content, in my case over 45 years paying the licence fee

Absolutely, I think there are lots of people who feel the same way as it was in the news recently that  very few continue subscribing after the 30 day free trial. If you pay your license fee to access BBC iPlayer then why should you have to make a second payment to access Britbox, it doesn't make sense.