TV Licence article Discussion

Cornucopia

JamesGentleman wrote: »

Not anywhere have I heard anyone mention the fact that it is illegal “Extortion” for anyone to forcefully make you pay for something that you do not want or need.

Not true.

In the same way that you are forced to collect VAT for the government at your own expense and own liability; it also is extortion, immoral and illegal.

Nope.

As with most laws, they rely on submission from the meek and naive among us, so to enable their enforcement!

Not really. The legal framework that TV Licensing operates to is incredibly weak
compared to, say, HMRC. Indeed, there are swathes of video content now not covered by the Licence regime. The issue is that many of the people that TV Licensing deal with do not understand that they have very limited powers, and TV Licensing are in no hurry to tell them. (For certain aspects of this process, that approach is very shabby,
and may be unlawful).

Over the years the BBC have modified the Communications Act
Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations to meet their immoral needs ...

Not true. The laws have changed rarely (this is part of the problem).

It is also imminent that they are going to modify the law again so you will need a TV licence for even non-live (recorded) broadcasts as it is effectively their property.

Not entirely. The proposal is that catch-up from the 4 PSB broadcasters should be included in the Licence. Even then, there's so much happening with the BBC that we may never see that, or it could be very short-lived.

...it is up to them to remove my ability to access their products/services from my devices remotely, whatever the devices, be it a TV, Computer, or Mobile Phone.

Yes - hence the calls for the BBC to move to a subscription model.

caryjs

hi guys,

a quick question: I stupidly let a tv license man into my flat (I was asleep when he knocked so I was caught offguard) I demonstrated that my tv is not set up to receive a tv signal, which he seemed happy with.
However he turned his attention to my PC which was currently streaming a tournament of Counter Strike live on twitch.tv he then told me that I need a tv license and may face court or a fine for watching this without a license.

the tv lisence website states:

"Watching TV on the internet:
You need to be covered by a licence if you watch TV online at the same time as it's being broadcast on conventional TV in the UK or the Channel Islands."
obviously twitch.tv broadbasts are not shown on TV.

I am unsure if twitch.tv where it's often just ordinary people streaming games, sometimes for 10 viewers or less. surely by extension youtube would also need a license as they have a video game livestreaming service too?

any feedback would be appreciated. I'd rather not pay £145 as I don't actually watch tv or any of the conventional services. But if it's unavoidable I'll obviously (begrudgingly) pay it.

thanks in advance

oh, and as a side note. currently when you launch counter strike the livestream is automatically being shown in the in-game UI directly from twitch.tv Does this mean that even if I never watched twitch, and only played counter strike I would be breaking the law also?

Cornucopia

If twitch.tv is not broadcast as a Linear TV service in the UK (i.e. on satellite, cable or Freeview), then you do not need a Licence to watch it.

This reflects the Legislation, which is The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004, although I would say that its wording is somewhat convoluted.

You did not need to let the TVL person into your home, nor did you need to answer any of his questions. There was also no need to show him anything concerning your PC/Laptop/any other computing equipment, and if he examined it himself he may have been in breach of both BBC Policy. If he examined it without your permission, he may also have broken the Law.

If you did not give your name, and you did not sign anything, it's highly unlikely to result in a prosecution, although they may well come back, or send you a "final demand" letter.

I would suggest contacting TVL anonymously by phone and try to get confirmation from them that your streaming does not require a Licence.

duggie1982

Hi all

So tonight I got a visit after I cancelled my licence 3 months ago (was monthly DD for years) I said I dont watch live TV, he then asked if he could come in so can mark it down, I thought I would be fine as the TV is not even on. He then asked if i used my sky box to watch catch up and on demand, i said yes but no live tv, but he said i still need a licence for that?!

Is this the case? I said to him that i dont watch or record live TV but he said does not matter as Sky transmits it regardless if i watch it so need a licence.

I though to myself, well surely he aint going to lie, I asked him again and to note that the TV is currently off so he also cant witness me watching live TV, again he just said that as i access on demand from the sky box i need one.

When i check online I feel I still dont need one but signed up with him just in case i was in the wrong. I have emailed the TV licence people to ask just in case.

Who was right here?

cw18

I'm pretty certain it says you need in order to watch, but if you have kit connected that can receive it's a lot harder to prove you don't - even though I believe it's supposed to be down to them to prove you do. And you'd need to be sure none of your menu screens show an inset live feed (something I'm sure someone previously reported having).

duggie1982

Thanks for your reply. I dont have the in menu tv thing just for this reason, I access the on demand service by pressing my menu button on my remote that takes me right into the menu bypassing live TV. Think i may have been tricked into giving details

Cornucopia

duggie1982 wrote: »

...but he said does not matter as Sky transmits it regardless if i watch it so need a licence.

This is true, in fact Sky receives and records it regardless of watching, which makes Sky a poor choice of platform if you don't have a TV Licence. The recording (which is for Live Pause) is a particular problem.

... signed up with him ....

Did you literally sign something? What was it? What details did you give him?

The concern is that he has not just tricked you into buying a Licence, but possibly into giving details for a prosecution. (He was on commission).

duggie1982

I see, so I need one since i use the sky platform.

I gave him personal details like DOB name and direct debit details, I did not sign anything just gave me a A4 sheet with printed notes about providing tv licence etc but nothing else

Cornucopia

duggie1982 wrote: »

I gave him personal details like DOB name and direct debit details, I did not sign anything just gave me a A4 sheet with printed notes about providing tv licence etc but nothing else

DOB - that's a bad sign (why would he need DOB for a DD form?)

But if you didn't actually sign anything, you should be okay.

I see, so I need one since i use the sky platform.

The problem is that it's all a bit vague, and you ultimately end up having exactly the conversation with TVL that you had. Not least because paying a Sky sub (which is far from cheap) if you're not watching/recording TV seems odd.

Personally, I have Youview. It has a Freeview tuner in it, but without an aerial connection it doesn't work at all, and just produces a pleasing on-screen message about it. But it does have half-a-dozen on-demand players, including Netflix.

If you want access to Sky content on-demand then Now TV is a third of the price of a satellite sub.

duggie1982

Yip i already gave him it then he was asking my occupation then i refused so he moved on. Got a deal with sky as i only ever used their boxset service and on demand due to my working patterns and save them to my box (as my internet was slow, not now though but still in contract with sky so not looking to move to now tv until thats up)

I will wait and see what they say when they get back to me

I am not sure if i am even responsible as the house is rented under my sisters name and i stay there too, and they asked for me as it was myself that used to pay for the licence, either way, if we need one we need one but its the prosecution that is the worrying part