TV Licence article Discussion

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

IIUC, the implied permission to record off-air doesn't extend to keeping recordings forever.

I didn't say "forever". But well in excess of the usual 30 days for catchup. They are on a hard disk anyway so there's a natural flow through.

Zapito

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

I've got about 600 movies and TV series, on DVD/Bluray, so I have plenty of stuff to watch, without resorting to broadcast TV.

It also means, when I want a fix of TBBT (which is often), I can watch the episode(s) I want to watch, rather than the one(s) they happen to be broadcasting.

I can also watch shows that haven't been broadcast in years.

Enjoy (while you still can )

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

... I don't remember it.

Oh well, that's that, then.

It was your post I was responding to. And it was you who claimed the answers were required.

They are - required to properly answer the question previously asked. There was a whole series of posts about the "17%" - don't you remember?

Me, why should I care? I pay the licence and I think that morally you should too, certainly if you use BBC services...

There are plenty of LLF people who don't sully their eyes on BBC content - albeit for somewhat different reasons.

I could see the justification for anyone who never uses BBC (but if they use BBC radio or iPlayer or other BBC services then IMHO it's morally right to pay the licence too). But that's not the law anyway, the principle of the law is the Beeb is paid for by a levy on anyone who gets TV, and all the wiggly-out stuff is mere mean-minded squirmification to avoid paying a mere 40p per day.

The law goes through hugely complex twists and turns to get to where it goes at the moment - "Beeb being paid by a levy on anyone who gets TV" is most definitely not what it says, and not what it means - that's just a fanciful notion on your part.

It would be the simplest thing in the World for the Government to fix the issues with the Law as you see them, but they haven't done that, and I'm not even aware of the BBC having formally asked them to.

A bit like the tax laws that enable some people to wriggle their way out of paying. All in the same squalid boat, IYAM.

I have to say, I find the recent debate about the morality of Tax Avoidance to be a bit of a joke. The politicians are putting one over on us, yet again. The end result will be that the rich and the corporations will continue tax avoidance but it will become morally unacceptable for ordinary people to do it (if it isn't already). There doesn't even seem to be a consistent working definition of tax avoidance at the moment - HMRC's is a joke.

[Deleted User]

Zapito wrote: »

Enjoy (while you still can )

What do you mean by "while you still can" :huh:

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

I didn't say "forever".

You said "for as long as I like". Same issue.

But well in excess of the usual 30 days for catchup. They are on a hard disk anyway so there's a natural flow through.

I just find it morally questionable to keep TV recordings long-term, depriving the broadcasters of DVD sales.

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

You said "for as long as I like". Same issue.


I just find it morally questionable to keep TV recordings long-term, depriving the broadcasters of DVD sales.

You are beginning to seem desperate.:beer:

But I guess it is merely more of the slippery stuff

Cornucopia

What I'm suggesting is that anyone can adopt any arbitrary moral position they choose. But that position may have little or no credibility in the eyes of others, and in the grand scheme of things.

Consumer aspects of broadcasting is an area in which we probably need to take morality with a huge pinch of salt, because the whole mechanism is inherently unbalanced in favour of these huge corporations and against us as individuals.

The BBC makes content available to watch on-line without a TV Licence (it does that in full knowledge that to do so potentially undermines its own funding model). I don't see the immorality in watching some of it. Certainly it's no more immoral than undermining the commercial models of other broadcasters by skipping adverts or keeping long-term recordings instead of buying DVDs.

On the other hand, the broadcasters probably don't want us to examine them too closely from a moral perspective. BBC/TVL letters are an exercise in immorality - making threats to innocent people, spreading misinformation and trying to coerce citizens into actions that are not legally required.

For me, the immorality of BBC/TVL is orders of magnitude greater than that of people watching catch-up in their homes - not least because the BBC ought to know better, and ought to take its responsibilities more seriously. In other words, there are multiple levels to its immorality, and at each of those levels, and in all the minds of all the people who are involved, there is something wrong.

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

For me ... there are multiple levels to its immorality, and at each of those levels, and in all the minds of all the people who are involved, there is something wrong.

Well for me what is wrong here is simply that some people choose to fiddle their way around in order to consume BBC output without contributing towards its cost, to the disadvantage of all honest and straightforward licence fee payers.

If people didn't cheat and lie in that way then there would be no need for enforcement activity, and none of this verbose claptrap would arise.

What you are saying is nothing but convoluted slippery rhetoric. My term for it is Squirmology.

Exile_geordie

So there was a comres poll out recently which has only come to my attention via someone else - no other media has covered it I don't think.


Apologies on the formatting - hasn't come out quite right


http://comres.co.uk/polls/whitehouse-consultancy-bbc-survey/

SupportOpposeDon't knowAbolishing the licence fee and making the BBC fund itself, even if that means adverts during programmes, reducing the number of original programmes they can produce or scrapping their public service broadcasting duty52%
(+1)
34%
(NC)
15%
(NC)
The current system of a compulsory licence fee paid by individuals who watch live television41%
(+1)
41%
(+1)
18%
(-2)
Abolishing the licence fee and introducing a subscription fee paid only by those who want to access the BBC36%
(NC)
46%
(+2)
18%
(-2)
Abolishing the licence fee and funding the BBC through increased taxes15%
(-3)
69%
(+5)
17%
(-1)
Base: GB adults (n=2,035). Changes may not sum to zero due to rounding.

Zapito

Exile_geordie wrote: »

So there was a comres poll out recently which has only come to my attention via someone else - no other media has covered it I don't think. /

That's a political matter for anyone to engage with politically. What concerns me is people lying and cheating their way out of paying their fair share under the present rules.

BTW - The comres poll was in June '14. An IPSOS/MORI poll published in December '14 returned 53% for the present system.

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3500/Public-Views-of-Funding-Methods-for-the-BBC.aspx
.