Freeview with a twist!

Mr_Vengeance · 16 Sep 2007 at 23:07

big_white_dog84 said:
I detest people that boast about not having a TV licence. I don't particularly like paying £11 a month but I do so because I am a decent law abiding citizen. If all the scum that don't pay were also contributing £11 a month then maybe my fee would come down.

I'm scum because I have managed to get away without paying my TV Licence :confused:

Get a grip you hypocrite (Yeah yeah of course you have NEVER downloaded anything copyrighted from the net! :rolleyes:

)

flat-6 said:
No way those detector vans can be effective in halls anyway.

TV detector vans exist, but they do not detect anything. They are just for show. TVL have a database of addresses in the UK with or without a licence. It is just assumed that anyone without a TV licence is guilty, and so a campaign of harassment begins by letters and visits to intimidate people into buying a licence.

Fact 1:
Never in court has evidence been used to prosecute people (mainly single mothers) based on 'detector' van evidence.

Fact 2:
Although TVL threaten that they might apply for a search warrant if you do not let them in to inspect your house, it is very difficult indeed for them to apply for a warrant. They first need proof that you are receiving live broadcast. Never has 'detector van' evidence been used to apply for a warrant. Search warrants are very rarely applied for today.

The reason people get prosecuted is that they admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form. They assume a visiting TVL 'officer' has some sort of legal power when they visit. They have no more legal power than if any member of the public came round. Tell them to leave and they must immediately comply else be in breach of law.

z0mbi3 · 16 Sep 2007 at 23:29

Mr_Vengeance said:
I'm scum because I have managed to get away without paying my TV Licence Get a grip you hypocrite (Yeah yeah of course you have NEVER downloaded anything copyrighted from the net! )

He didn't call you scum directly, but if he had it would have been because you were advertising your license evasion.

A lot of us have to pay for our license for whatever reason, so you can't expect everyone to treat you like some sort of God sent freedom fighter because you've illegally gotten around it.

M3G4UK · 16 Sep 2007 at 23:29

Just a sidenote, the satellite dish for freesat, nine times out of ten, doesn't need to be mounted on the house. You can mount it on anything stable enough. They even do purpose-build tripods for satellite dishes.

Also, thought about basic cable? NTL used to do student rates... I'm sure virgin could rustle something up, especially if you're going to use their broadband.

coolpunkskater · 16 Sep 2007 at 23:32

they do basic tv for £10 a month or free tv with the phone line @ £11 a month

tsinc80697 · 16 Sep 2007 at 23:32

The internet is some crappy 2mb down connection, but it does have 2mb upload which is decent!
NTL stopped student deals just before they became Virgin, will look at those tripods though!

Rebelius · 17 Sep 2007 at 01:27

I don't get how you can say anyone without a TV licence is scum, even if they're not watching or recording live broadcast.

You DO NOT need a TV licence just to own a TV, you need it to watch or record live broadcasts. Having no TV licence when I just use my TV as a monitor for my PS2/PS3/DVD player is not breaking any rules at all.

Psyk · 17 Sep 2007 at 02:03

Rebelius said:
I don't get how you can say anyone without a TV licence is scum, even if they're not watching or recording live broadcast.

Presumably it wasn't aimed at those people. If any TV licencing people come round to my flat I'm gonna tell them to **** off. I already have a TV licence but that doesn't always stop them harrassing you.

Raymond Lin · 17 Sep 2007 at 02:19

so, any recommendation for a good booster?

Christo · 17 Sep 2007 at 02:27

One option I am considering is getting a Slingbox connected to the main aerial (downstairs) and linking the slingbox to my pc using a powerplug - then you got a tv reception - a bit extreme I know!

eXor · 17 Sep 2007 at 08:08

coolpunkskater said:
theres no way you can prove you dont need a licence its very hard

You don't need to prove a thing.

Man-trying-to-look-like-he-has-police-powers-by-wearing-a-high-visibility-jacket: "You have no license, so we need to check your property."

You:"Do you have a court issued search warrant?"

Man-:"Er, no."

You: "Then you are trespassing. Please leave!"
[/close door]

coolpunkskater · 17 Sep 2007 at 10:49

eXor said:
You don't need to prove a thing.

Man-trying-to-look-like-he-has-police-powers-by-wearing-a-high-visibility-jacket: "You have no license, so we need to check your property."

You:"Do you have a court issued search warrant?"

Man-:"Er, no."

You: "Then you are trespassing. Please leave!"
[/close door]

I shell do that next time they come knocking

leaskovski · 17 Sep 2007 at 11:22

Mr_Vengeance said:
TV detector vans exist, but they do not detect anything. They are just for show. TVL have a database of addresses in the UK with or without a licence. It is just assumed that anyone without a TV licence is guilty, and so a campaign of harassment begins by letters and visits to intimidate people into buying a licence.

I am pretty sure they do work chap. I saw some documentry on the discovery chanel way back about snopping vans and how equipment is used to display a carbon copy of someones CRT due. Im not sure how it works, but i am pretty sure they work....

Anyway, just pay the licence you tax dodger!

Legoman · 17 Sep 2007 at 11:29

leaskovski said:
I am pretty sure they do work chap. I saw some documentry on the discovery chanel way back about snopping vans and how equipment is used to display a carbon copy of someones CRT due. Im not sure how it works, but i am pretty sure they work....

If they exist and work (because the Discovery Channel says so) then how come nobody has ever been prosecuted in court on the basis of evidence from such equipment?

The technology may exist but "TV Detector Vans" are just one of the many myths put out by TV Licensing to scare the credulous and gullible into buying a TV Licence.

coolpunkskater · 17 Sep 2007 at 11:31

Legoman said:
If they exist and work (because the Discovery Channel says so) then how come nobody has ever been prosecuted in court on the basis of evidence from such equipment?

The technology may exist but "TV Detector Vans" are just one of the many myths put out by TV Licensing to scare the credulous and gullible into buying a TV Licence.

No there not they also walk around with ariel things in there hands just cos its not been used in court as far as any one here knows dont mean it cant happen

leaskovski · 17 Sep 2007 at 11:42

http://bss.sfsu.edu/fischer/IR 360/Readings/tempest.htm

The above is an interesting read on signal detection.

Some more information on TEMPEST monitoring....

http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/tempest.html

And the wiki page.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEMPEST has a reference to TV licence enforcement using the technology.

coolpunkskater · 17 Sep 2007 at 11:43

very interesting so much is true

Legoman · 17 Sep 2007 at 12:05

coolpunkskater said:
No there not they also walk around with ariel things in there hands just cos its not been used in court as far as any one here knows dont mean it cant happen

<sigh> For any evidence from "detection equipment" to be used in court TVL would need to explain how it works and provide test and calibration certificates.

TVL have never explained or divulged how such equipment works. In fact they say on their website that the equipment is so secret that their engineers that develop such equipment work in isolation of each other!

Speed cameras on the other hand are tested and calibrated and such certificates are provided in court.

The "aerial thing" that the TVL goon was walking around with was a theatrical prop made up by the BBC special effects department.

As I said before nobody has been prosecuted in court on the basis of evidence from "TV detection equipment"

Such "detection equipment" is a myth. It's just for show.

Besides, there is little point in detecting television sets because it is perfectly legal to use a television to watch pre-recorded tapes and DVDs without a TV Licence.

TVL "enforcment officers" have nothing more sophisticated than a clipboard and pen to take your voluntary confession.

yipyipboo · 17 Sep 2007 at 12:10

leaskovski said:
http://bss.sfsu.edu/fischer/IR 360/Readings/tempest.htm

The above is an interesting read on signal detection.

Some more information on TEMPEST monitoring....

http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/tempest.html

And the wiki page.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEMPEST has a reference to TV licence enforcement using the technology.

makes for interesting reading.... :eek:

leaskovski · 17 Sep 2007 at 12:15

yipyipboo said:
makes for interesting reading....

The fact that some of the info regarding it is classified by the US military pretty much says that they use this stuff. GCHQ do a lot of work with it as well.

Legoman · 17 Sep 2007 at 12:22

leaskovski said:
The fact that some of the info regarding it is classified by the US military pretty much says that they use this stuff. GCHQ do a lot of work with it as well.

Don't be silly. How does the fact that something is classified mean that it is used? For TVL to use any evidence in court the fact that it is classified means nobody knows how it works and therefore would be inadmissable.

Why has nobody ever been prosecuted on the basis of evidence from such equipment?