Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,049
- Location
- La France
Yeah, but doesn't France automatically steal their licence fee via general taxation as part of the taxe d’habitation?
Quoi? Les bâtards!
Yeah, but doesn't France automatically steal their licence fee via general taxation as part of the taxe d’habitation?
30 days is because that's the agreement the BBC have with the show's production team and rights owners, which is pretty normal (unless they own it completely and have paid for the performance rights in perpetuity*).Yes I also found out today that you can only go back 30 days for most shows. If I want to watch the GW programmes from March this year I have to look to YouTube or DailyMotion. Which are basically hosting these shows illegally.
Tbh I can't see a future in which I pay my TV License. The BBC does not seem to represent the kind of programming that I want to see, and I'll be damned if my hard-earned goes to fund "commercially viable" programming like the other **** they churn out. They seem to want to be a broadcaster that sells shows to Dave for a living.
Google. Whilst looking for the earlier GW shows from March this year. Dated around May 2018.
I think you might have the definition of "Public Service" a little too tightly defined. One of the BBC's remits is entertainment, which is where Strictly would fall under, as is culture, which it would also fall under. Providing entertainment to millions every week ("chasing ratings") is part of the BBC's job.
Strictly is something like 15 years old, is that really "new format"?
Specifically GW - this show is created/produced by BBC Studios (I'm aware of legal issues with shows such as MotD and many others).30 days is because that's the agreement the BBC have with the show's production team and rights owners, which is pretty normal (unless they own it completely and have paid for the performance rights in perpetuity*).
Of course if the BBC didn't care about the legalities of it they could have it up for years as well, but that would be problematic for them to say the least(not only from the legal point of view, but because if they did that they'd have a very very short list of people willing to work for them).
I dont intent to ever buy a tv licence again. I dont watch tv anyway. Maybe F1.....on my tablet
So you watch TV then (on your tablet)![]()
If he's only been in the house for a week it was clearly aimed at the previous tenant...A friend just sent me this:
![]()
He's been in his new house for less than a week and he gets a letter like that???
Incredible...how is this allowed by any stretch of the imagination? Why is this harassment tolerated by the authorities? Why isn't this being looked at by a watchdog or something? Blatantly using scare tactics to intimidate people, I mean look at the choice of words! ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL, LEGAL COSTS, FINES..... You would think that he's committed a serious crime! but no, he just hasn't got round to switching his tv license from his old property. You couldn't have wrote a more chitty letter if you tried, appalling.
If he's only been in the house for a week it was clearly aimed at the previous tenant...
A friend just sent me this:
![]()
He's been in his new house for less than a week and he gets a letter like that???
Incredible...how is this allowed by any stretch of the imagination? Why is this harassment tolerated by the authorities? Why isn't this being looked at by a watchdog or something? Blatantly using scare tactics to intimidate people, I mean look at the choice of words! ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL, LEGAL COSTS, FINES..... You would think that he's committed a serious crime! but no, he just hasn't got round to switching his tv license from his old property. You couldn't have wrote a more chitty letter if you tried, appalling.
Tell them you'll be in on the XX of November and don't be in
I once did that to some coldcallers and they were very grumpy when they phoned me again lol