TV Licence Super Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ken
  • Start date Start date
spoffle said:
Why should someone who watches YouTube streams feel any obligation to "contribute" financially to the TV license? What are you even talking about?
Click to expand...

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one?

H3kj1Gq.jpg
 
It takes the pee with sky and virgin, as they have already paid the BBC to air their content and then we have to pay them again with a TV licence, so they get paid twice...
 
It also takes the pee how the BBC can muscle in on channels which have nothing to do with them and demand everyone have a licence to watch theirs too.
 
WTF is he posting that for anyway, I know and always have known when and when not a licence is needed unlike most who keep saying its for owning a TV (not just talking about in this forum), is he campaigning to save the BBC licence?
 
surprising ow many people above don't realise , any iPlayer use is out -
but yes a sky like packaging, where you get news for free, but have package options for other gendres , soap, reality ... bring it on.

Anyway, how much netflix/amazon etc content is also pirated, is illegal use an issue for them too & what are they doing ?

You don’t need a licence if you only ever watch on demand or catch up programmes on services other than BBC iPlayer (and you also never watch live TV programmes on any channel, including on iPlayer).
Click to expand...
 
b00merang69 said:
WTF is he posting that for anyway, I know and always have known when and when not a licence is needed unlike most who keep saying its for owning a TV (not just talking about in this forum), is he campaigning to save the BBC licence?
Click to expand...

I was responding to a question, it's even quoted with the image & link.

Try to breathe from your nose instead of your mouth, it'll help you concentrate on the simple things. ;)
 
b00merang69 said:
WTF is he posting that for anyway, I know and always have known when and when not a licence is needed unlike most who keep saying its for owning a TV (not just talking about in this forum), is he campaigning to save the BBC licence?
Click to expand...
Well to be fair even the BBC don't seem sure!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51373372

Edit: They changed it It did say anyone who installs or watches a TV earlier! Someone obviously pulled them up on it.
 
Last edited:
They took that out years ago. It was always legal to own a TV without a "licence". But the BBC used to tell people it wasnt.

I hope they do decriminalize it ,because then we can all just watch TV without paying and not give a crap. "Its a civil matter", aka no one cares.
 
Last edited:
Nasher said:
They took that out years ago. It was always legal to own a TV without a "licence". But the BBC used to tell people it wasnt.

I hope they do decriminalize it ,because then we can all just watch TV without paying and not give a crap. "Its a civil matter", aka no one cares.
Click to expand...

We can all just watch TV without paying? Really? :p

Are the digital signals going to be powered by magical fairy dust when the TV license gets abolished?
 
if it's no longer a criminal offence, will the costs to the tax payer of pursuing offenders under civil law and, even burden of proof, be reduced ?

do they need an alternative licensing mechanism in place before they will do it, though.
 
jpaul said:
do they need an alternative licensing mechanism in place before they will do it, though.
Click to expand...

Of course they would, it would leave a massive funding gap in a whole array of areas that depend on it. It's a huge public service, even areas like the broadband infrastructure would be affected. Current free to air channels out with the BBC couldn't exist if they had to fund the infrastructure that they depend on.
 
robgmun said:
YouTube streams does not equal Live
Click to expand...

They can be. If you watched a YouTube stream of BBC News which was the same broadcast as on TV, then you would need a licence.

If you watched a YouTube stream that wasn't being broadcast on TV, then you don't require a licence.
 
jpaul said:
if it's no longer a criminal offence, will the costs to the tax payer of pursuing offenders under civil law and, even burden of proof, be reduced ?
Click to expand...

Moving to a civil penalty would reduce the burden of proof from "beyond reasonable doubt" to "on the balance on probabilities". That may not be preferable to many people.
 
FlamBango said:
Well it's been just over a year, license free. I had one letter near to when I signed off it and nothing since, not even a knock on the door which is a little disappointing tbh. I genuinely don't watch the TV anymore, on any channel. Might look at their website occasionally for a laugh at the comments sections and might listen to a bit of radio 4ex , which I'd be happy to subscribe to.

Naughty me for dodging that I guess , but I'm not funding 1M a year salaries for sports presenters on channels that don't broadcast sports!
Click to expand...

What? You mean you weren’t raped. How did you avoid that!?
 
Or, the governments motivation in sidelining the BBC maybe political, was the BBC too balanced with respect to Brexit;
it's easier to manipulate the proles, via social media, so, even if you don't like the big salaries (they can address that), better the devil you know, and, to have, a somewhat accountable, fact-checked media, versus USA alternative.

BBC on the r4 news, talking up Blue Planet, as an example of their raison d'être, 0.75Bn watched it ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom