TV Licence article Discussion

JimmyTheWig

Kazzywonder wrote: »

They won’t be covered by their parents’ licence either, unless they only ever use devices that are powered solely by their own internal batteries, and aren’t plugged into an aerial or the mains".

So does this actually mean that if my Son only uses his laptop battery, then he can watch what he wants & doesn't have to get a Licence?

Yes, that's my understanding of it. If the laptop isn't plugged into the mains, your son lives at your address outside of term-time and you have a TV licence then he will be covered by your licence.

However...

He doesn't actually watch any Live or On-Demand TV, only films via Netflix etc.

... it doesn't sound like he needs a licence anyway, so can watch whilst plugged in.

cw18

Kazzywonder wrote: »

He doesn't actually watch any Live or On-Demand TV, only films via Netflix etc.

Many thanks

If that's all he watches, then he doesn't need a licence - same as I don't need one for my home to be able to stream via Netflix / Amazon on my plugged in Smart TV set.

wymondham

what does it matter if something runs on batteries or mains? shows how so out of date the whole license system is....

Cornucopia

wymondham wrote: »

what does it matter if something runs on batteries or mains? shows how so out of date the whole license system is....

These are the mundane questions of detail that the law has to get into in order to decide what a "TV Receiver" is in an increasingly complex technical environment.

shaun_from_Africa

wymondham wrote: »

what does it matter if something runs on batteries or mains? shows how so out of date the whole license system is....

Cornucopia wrote: »

These are the mundane questions of detail that the law has to get into in order to decide what a "TV Receiver" is in an increasingly complex technical environment.

It doesn't matter if the unit runs on batteries or mains. Provided it has the ability to receive live television by any means (satellite, Wi-Fi, internet, digital terrestrial etc) then it is classed as a television receiver.
This is why smartphones, tablets etc fall under the licencing requirements if used to watch live tv.

Cornucopia

So a Smartphone isn't a TV Receiver if it isn't used to watch "live" TV?

shaun_from_Africa

Cornucopia wrote: »

So a Smartphone isn't a TV Receiver if it isn't used to watch "live" TV?

Correct.
Legally it is only a receiver if it is installed or used (or intended to be installed or used) for the purposes of watching live TV.
If the owner/user of the phone has no intention of using it to watch live TV then it is not a receiver as far as licensing legislation is concerned.

The TV licence is only needed for the phone if one of 2 conditions apply.
1/ the receiver is installed or intended to be installed (I don't think that the definition of installed is actually defined anywhere) or
2/ Someone actually uses or intends to use the phone as a TV receiver.


I couldn't add links when I posted the info above so will do so now.
It is the Communications act 2003 that states when a licence is required:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/363
And it's the Communications (TV licensing) regulations that actually define what a TV receiver is:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/692/regulation/9/made

JimmyTheWig

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

It doesn't matter if the unit runs on batteries or mains. Provided it has the ability to receive live television by any means (satellite, Wi-Fi, internet, digital terrestrial etc) then it is classed as a television receiver.
This is why smartphones, tablets etc fall under the licencing requirements if used to watch live tv.

It's a television receiver, but if it is being run on batteries then it is portable.

I've got a TV licence that covers me at home.
If I go to a friend's house and watch live TV (whether it is their TV or I bring my own from home) they need a licence.
If I watch live TV on a smartphone on the bus, the bus doesn't need a TV licence. I'm covered by my own one.
The difference is, in the last one it is a portable device.

Cornucopia

I think we all have the same understanding on this.

The question is, with just 2 days to go: does the Public get it?

I'm thinking not. Not least because they didn't generally understand the old rules, and adding a bit more on is not going to help.

Also, as a soon-to-be erstwhile watcher of iPlayer, I don't think I've seen anything on there to inform me of the change. Why on Earth didn't the BBC do that - it's the obvious approach.

Cornucopia

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

I couldn't add links when I posted the info above so will do so now.
It is the Communications act 2003 that states when a licence is required:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/363
And it's the Communications (TV licensing) regulations that actually define what a TV receiver is:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/692/regulation/9/made

Thanks.

As a wrangler of legislation, have you managed to resolve the question of whether a Licence is required to stream foreign channels (those not available by conventional means in the UK) live over the Internet?

The legislation is torturous, diving around all over the place between the two documents above. However, whenever I look at it, I cannot help but conclude that a Licence is not required, and yet TVL say it is.

I should say that they used to say not, as well, but they changed their advice even though the law didn't (AFAIK) change.