TV Licence article Discussion

[Deleted User]

TheGardenGnome wrote: »

I referred to the summons as 'I' simply because it was me who would have defended my wife in court acting as a 'McKenzie Friend' but yes, the summons was in her name as she signed the 'confession-a-gram'.

You also stated:-

I replied to the summons with a not guilty plea and requested a court hearing with the goon present.

You can't enter a not guilty plea, to a summons in someone else's name.

Only the accused can enter a plea.

cw18

slow_saver wrote: »

But can you honestly say you NEVER watch anything made by the BBC, or you never listen to BBC radio including local radio?

other than really, really old BBC shows (such as The Good Life) which I own on DVD, then yes I can say I never watch any BBC shows or listen to any BBC stations (including local ones).

I hadn't done for several years before I cancelled my licence.

lech_2

teddyco wrote: »

Turn off the TV and read a good book. The stuff on TV these days is beyond bizarre.

Amen to that! 99.9% of television is total rubbish.

Not sure if this point has been raised (I didn't have time to read through all 74 pages of posts), but it would be interesting to know what constitutes live TV, in particular online. Imagine you are watching a foreign channel 'live' online. This will certainly be delayed by a good few seconds relative to the television broadcast in a faraway land. What if the broadcaster (or a third-party proxy, legally) set up a function to delay the transmission of data by 1 minute or 2 minutes. At what point would it become legal? Or does the 'broadcast' need to have finished before its transmission, no matter how much delayed, is no longer considered live?

This could potentially be a loophole for people to watch (almost)-live foreign TV legally without a licence.

iancarbarns

sniggings wrote: »

wrong, for proof go on their own site and it clearly says ONLY if watching live TV.

There is even an option on there to inform them you only use your TV for catchup TV.

You are wrong. The TVL website is not definitive, the LAW is. End Of.

Another post correctly defines installed & TV Receiver: it means installed capable of receiving live TV. So if your TV set is connected to an aerial,you need a licence. If it is connected to a games console or DVD player (but not an aerial, and you don't watch live TV over the internet through some means), then you don't need a licence.

The point is, the licence is needed for installing a device capable of receiving (or recording) live TV, even if you don't watch it.

iancarbarns

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Pity you didn't read on.

368 Meanings of “television receiver” and “use”

(3) References in this Part to using a television receiver are references to using it for receiving television programmes.

I did read on. If you install a TV set in a way that is capable of viewing live TV (eg, connect it to an aerial rather than just to a DVD player), you need a licence

Cornucopia

You don't. (What possible reason would TVL and MSE have for saying otherwise?)

The issue is not capability per se, but that Magistrates will accept evidence of installation for use as evidence of use. (Just as they will for all sorts of other offences - evidence that a theft has been committed as evidence of theft, for example).

It's a subtle point, but quite an important one.

You need a licence to watch/record TV broadcasts. You would also be wise to "install" your AV equipment in such a way that it cannot be misconstrued as being installed for the purpose of reception.

I'm not sure what else I/we can do to prove the point? How about this, it's from an official Tony Hall speech, published on the BBC website:-

I welcome the Committee’s endorsement of our proposal to require people to pay the licence fee even if they only watch catch-up television.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2015/tony-hall-bbc-internet-era

Can we accept that the head honcho probably has understood this properly, even if we don't necessarily agree with his conclusions - which are typically self-serving?

iancarbarns

sniggings wrote: »

Magistrates hear most of these cases, many are part time so their grip on the law is not the best, also they go on a "reasonable belief " if you have a TV and a aerial in the back of it, it's not a big jump to say you have been watching, they don't have to see the act, same as a murderer doesn't have to be seen stabbing the victim to be found guilty.

A TV with an aerial connected is INSTALLED and capable of receiving live TV. That is an offence unless you have a licence. (ie installation even without watching is an offence)

Cornucopia

What about a TV that has an aerial, but whose TV channels are all detuned?

iancarbarns

sniggings wrote: »

You are allowed, getting a workable solution is the problem here.

Not sure what you are having difficulty with, once the site detects where you are, you should e allow to access the same channels as anyone else in that country.

The problem is that BBC iPlayer blocks viewing if your computer seems to be outside the UK. It does this based on your IP address, which is likely to be foreign if you are outside the UK.

Workarounds are:
1. Connect using your business laptop, through your company network. If you work for a UK company, this will probably have a UK IP address - no problem
2. Use a VPN service to get a UK IP address eg https://www.bestUKvpn.com or https://www.freeUKvpn.com

If living permanently abroad, in Europe, just install a satellite dish and you can receive freesat. You will likely need a larger (eg 80 cm) dish than needed in England if you are off the target part of the satellite transmission beam. (You will likely need a TV licence for the country you are in, though)

sniggings

iancarbarns wrote: »

A TV with an aerial connected is INSTALLED and capable of receiving live TV. That is an offence unless you have a licence. (ie installation even without watching is an offence)

wrong, you have to be found guilty of watching too.