TV Licence article Discussion

madmuppet5

rogerblack wrote: »

Then they don't have much of a clue.

Addressing for the moment analogue TVs.

These have local oscillators, that emit a very, very weak signal.
This can be picked up with a sensitive detector.
The light emitted by the scanning beam can be picked up, and correlated with TV programs, to work out the program. (Or even in some cases recover the picture directly)

The picture can be received directly from parasitic emissions directly from the electron gun.

For LCD/plasma TVs some of these techniques become less useful, and with digital TVs, it all gets rather more involved again.

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emc2011-tv.pdf - for example shows partial pictures recovered - with difficulty - from the emenations of modern LCD TVs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_phreaking - is the more general case.

My approach to doing this would be fairly simple - for relatively long range, you point a camera at a random street at night, and record the colour of light emitted by each window, on a fraction of a second basis.
You then compare this with the brightness of a few dozen live TV channels.
Over a short period - a few minutes - the vast number of brightness changes mean that you can use mathematical techniques to make invisible to the eye flashes from the TV tied to a specific program.
For a close-in detector, a similar approach for sound works well.

:rotfl::rotfl:You shouldn't believe everything you read on the net

As this relates to VHF/UHF receivers that is defunct anyway.
It's been mentioned before that no one has ever been prosecuted with evidence from a TV detector van or a hand-held detector.

The only way you can be sure that someone is receiving a live signal is by using your eyes. :cool:

adouglasmhor

TKW wrote: »

That's a remarkably confident answer for such a hairy question! To answer the OP, yes you need a licence while you are watching the live stream.

When you press pause on BBC iplayer you stop receiving the stream of data from the BBC. You are not recording it on your computer. You are also not causing the stream to be recorded by the BBC for you to watch later as the BBC are doing that of their own volition to provide a service (time-shifted shows) to all their customers. Really, are you sure? When you pause it it continues to download to your temp file

When you press play again a request is sent to the BBC iPlayer service to send you a stream starting at the point where you previously pressed pause.

I would argue that, therefore, you do not require a licence for the second part of your viewing.

All a bit pointless, though, as you do need one to start watching the programme! I suppose you might start watching a programme, pause it while your license expires and then restart the programme legally but that's all getting a bit silly

Really, are you sure? When you pause it it continues to download to your temp file, when you restart it plays from there, if you don't believe me - why not check and you will see it happen.

madmuppet5

ROBDOLPHIN66 wrote: »

I think that this is potentially a dangerous and misleading article, because WHEN they update the rules not everybody will realise and people could get caught out.

There are people in this thread saying that they have never been prosecuted, but there are others that have. Some people may be happy to take the risk where as others would be extremely distressed by a letter, let alone a visit.

Is the old thing about the potential to receive (colour) TV still in force? If it is, then surely they would argue that anybody with a smartphone, freeview box, PC, tablet, satellite dish etc etc had the ability to watch live TV, even if they did not do so.

When they update the rules I'm sure MSE will update the article.
The only reason why people have been prosecuted is when they admit to watching live broadcasts, the TV is clearly visible from outside or you've let the enforcement officer check the equipment. Enforcement officers have no more right than I do to enter your home

rogerblack

madmuppet5 wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl:You shouldn't believe everything you read on the net

As this relates to VHF/UHF receivers that is defunct anyway.
It's been mentioned before that no one has ever been prosecuted with evidence from a TV detector van or a hand-held detector./QUOTE]

That does not mean that they are not used in investigations.
See the above link.
It refers to digital TVs.

Itsnotfair

anotheruser wrote: »

You are grossly mis-informed.
Channel 4, 5, ITV and Sky all receive a part of the licence fee. The BBC takes most of it yes but not all.

I don't agree with the fee either but I wouldn't want all the rubbish American TV has to do to operate (hundreds of adverts, all those extra pieces in the way of the actual programme).

It's a catch 22 as TVL can't prove you are watching live TV, but you can't prove you're not. No easy way to solve the problem.

However I wonder if the Director General of the BBC would be getting such a high salary if they had to rely on adverts....[/QUOTE


The BBC Does advertise but does not pay directly to the advertiser. Just watch EastEnders and see all the beer bottles and goods in the shops facing towards the cameras. The BBC says this is to make it look real. If ITV do this they are immediately reported.

cw18

Itsnotfair wrote: »

Why do I have to pay 12 months when I am away for 6 months in Europe.
If I do not use anything for any length of time I do not have to pay. The BBC forces me to pay for 1 year. Before someone says only pay for 3 months. It does not help to pay for 3 months as I still have to pay for the full year. We live in a society dominated by the BBC who make their own laws and ignore anything their fee paying public do.

If you're going to be away for 6 months and NO-ONE ELSE is going to be watching live TV at the licenced address while you're away, then cancel the licence and ask for a refund. But they only refund for full quarters, so if you need it for 4 months and then cancel you'll only get 6 months back not 8. Then when you come back in 6 months time (ie. 10 months after starting the origincal licence) you'll have to pay for another 12 months as it classes as a new licence.






I'm totally bewildered by all the people saying they get loads of contact after cancelling their licence. Did you actually complete the form stating why you don't need one? I did it on line, and after buying a new TV (for DVD use and NetFlix/Lovefilm streaming only) they sent me a letter saying they couldn't trace a licence for the address - and all I did was go on-line and fill in a form to say I still didn't need one. As the TV developed a major fault and had to be replaced (refund and purchase from somewhere else) I've been through this process 3 times since cancelling (I'd also bought a TV just before cancelling which they weren't notified about until a week after I did!), but that's the sum total of contact I've had in almost 2.5 years. Each time I contact them this way they thank me for letting them know, and inform me that I won't hear from them for 2 years (unless I purchase another appliance) although they may call round to perform an inspection within that time. I've not had a thing, and shouldn't now hear anything from them until June 2014.

madmuppet5

rogerblack wrote: »

madmuppet5 wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl:You shouldn't believe everything you read on the net

As this relates to VHF/UHF receivers that is defunct anyway.
It's been mentioned before that no one has ever been prosecuted with evidence from a TV detector van or a hand-held detector./QUOTE]

That does not mean that they are not used in investigations.
See the above link.
It refers to digital TVs.

Why would they even bother if they can't use the "evidence". I very much doubt even if the technology existed it would be legal to use. I mean if I saw someone pointing a camera or binoculars at my dwelling I know where I would stick their hand-held

madmuppet5

cw18 wrote: »

If you're going to be away for 6 months and NO-ONE ELSE is going to be watching live TV at the licenced address while you're away, then cancel the licence and ask for a refund. But they only refund for full quarters, so if you need it for 4 months and then cancel you'll only get 6 months back not 8. Then when you come back in 6 months time (ie. 10 months after starting the origincal licence) you'll have to pay for another 12 months as it classes as a new licence.






I'm totally bewildered by all the people saying they get loads of contact after cancelling their licence. Did you actually complete the form stating why you don't need one? I did it on line, and after buying a new TV (for DVD use and NetFlix/Lovefilm streaming only) they sent me a letter saying they couldn't trace a licence for the address - and all I did was go on-line and fill in a form to say I still didn't need one. As the TV developed a major fault and had to be replaced (refund and purchase from somewhere else) I've been through this process 3 times since cancelling (I'd also bought a TV just before cancelling which they weren't notified about until a week after I did!), but that's the sum total of contact I've had in almost 2.5 years. Each time I contact them this way they thank me for letting them know, and inform me that I won't hear from them for 2 years (unless I purchase another appliance) although they may call round to perform an inspection within that time. I've not had a thing, and shouldn't now hear anything from them until June 2014.

If Tescos asked you to confirm that you hadn't bought any milk and they sent someone around to check your fridge would you be happy with that?

TKW

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Really, are you sure? When you pause it it continues to download to your temp file, when you restart it plays from there, if you don't believe me - why not check and you will see it happen.

Interesting, I've just checked and, on my laptop, the network activity ceases when I pause the stream.

cw18

madmuppet5 wrote: »

If Tescos asked you to confirm that you hadn't bought any milk and they sent someone around to check your fridge would you be happy with that?

If I were claiming to have been charged for some I hadn't received and was asking for a refund, then yes......