No, you need a license if you watch or otherwise receive a tv signal as it is being broadcast.
There is no such 'original source' clause. If you think there, please link to it, as it's something no-one else seems to have ever read.
If you are recording things, you are receiving the live signal and thus fall under the license requirements.
If I recorded something, put it on a DVD and gave it to you at work, you wouldn't need a license but I would, regardless of the fact the 'original source' was a live signal.
I didn't say there was a clause, but it's common sense. They say you require a license to watch TV as it's broadcast, or to receive and record broadcast programming.
You do not need a license to watch shows via a catchup service, despite the content being the same thing.
Ergo, you need a license if your source of programming you acquire yourself is from a live broadcast.
As for the DVD recording scenario, sure, but I'd bet the reason behind that is more to do with the fact that there's literally nothing they can do about it, but I fully expect them to try and say in as vague a manner as possible that you're not allowed to without saying "you're not allowed".
You know, like when DVD movies, games, music CDs or Blurays have "Do not lend/No unauthorised lending" printed on them? They will imply it's against the licensing terms, but won't explicitly say it because it can't be enforced.
It's the same as if someone was recording TV to DVD themselves to watch later, and TV Licensing were suspicious of them.
How could they prove said person recorded it themselves, or their neighbor recorded it and gave them the DVD?
I wasn't talking about iPlayer no, however it can and does apply to iPlayer if you're using iPlayer to view live broadcasts.
For the on demand aspect of iPlayer, no it doesn't.
must have been sometime last year when I watched every race live.
