I don't think I had any visits in about 8 years.
barely had any letters since covid too, I'm not even sure if I had one letter last year
TV Licence Super Thread
- Thread starter Ken
- Start date
barely had any letters since covid too, I'm not even sure if I had one letter last year
cnn appears to have become like netflix (e: well more interesting content too) , so no license - if you read the link.
If it's the same as the Sky broadcast, or any other tv broadcast, then a licence is needed.
I read that part of the agreement for it coming back is that the majority of content needs to be original so they can't just use it for re-runs. All those things are on iplayer anyway so doesn't really matter but looking at what BBC Three is airing I'm struggling to see why it needed to come back.
Deleted member 68110
D
Deleted member 68110
If you like UAE/Qatar so much why don't you go live there? /standardantiwokesolution
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,349
That seems very dodgy wording as I assume they mean if a BBC program is live on netflix/prime, although not sure if that's ever happened. Haven't really though about if you only ever watch sky go if you need a licence or not? Fwiw I do have a license, and sky, and prime, and netflix and disney. Maybe I need to drop a couple
.If it's live yes, but I understand there is on demand content on there too which doesn't require a licence.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 2,136
That seems very dodgy wording as I assume they mean if a BBC program is live on netflix/prime, although not sure if that's ever happened. Haven't really though about if you only ever watch sky go if you need a licence or not? Fwiw I do have a license, and sky, and prime, and netflix and disney. Maybe I need to drop a couple
If BBC is airing somethibg live on YT or whatever, then that's BBC's issue and not the viewer.
Like the poster before, watching live football on Prime does not warrant BBCs stinking licence, but they'll cobble together some nonsensical jibberish to confuse people into thinking they do.
it’s any programme which is part of a TV channel, broadcast or transmitted for everyone to watch at the same time.
that seemed the discriminating sentence - so, part of a everyone (= free to air?) tv(or satellite?) channel,
so CNN feed, now in subscription, excluded, but sky news not.
It's the viewers issue as they've chosen to watch it live.
You may not think it warrants it but watching football live on Prime requires a TV licence.
iff that match were also on a tv channel, like I suggested
concurs, anyway -> https://old.reddit.com/r/UKPersonal...i_need_a_tv_license_to_stream_football_being/
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,349
Even if its from a none bbc channel?
If you watch a live stream broadcast from the planet Zog in Alpha Centauri, the BBC will require you to have a licence.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,349
Which is a joke imo. Should only be related to BBC channels, especially if its being streamed as I can't see what it would have to do with BBC in that case.
I guess this goes to highlight what the license really is for - keeping the failing BBC alive, and another revenue stream for Capita
And why is that a bad thing? To have a non commercially driven channel who can produce content that may not be commercially passed/sufficiently audience popular? And with the bonus of no annoying Philip Schofield adverts.
It's peanuts in the household expenditure and given the amount of radio and other BBC content I rely on daily I really don't have an issue with it. I think we'd be worse off without the bbc
Don't get me wrong though the quality of their politics and journalism has tanked in recent years but then hardly surprising when they keep having their funding reduced in real terms by a gov presumably trying to run them into obsoletion to justify getting rid of them. (Privatisation 101)
It's peanuts in the household expenditure and given the amount of radio and other BBC content I rely on daily I really don't have an issue with it. I think we'd be worse off without the bbc
Don't get me wrong though the quality of their politics and journalism has tanked in recent years but then hardly surprising when they keep having their funding reduced in real terms by a gov presumably trying to run them into obsoletion to justify getting rid of them. (Privatisation 101)
Clearly you're happy to pay the fee and it's peanuts for you, but what about the not-so-well off; the people that rely on food banks, the unemployed, and just those scraping by on minimum wage? £160 is not peanuts to them, yet why should they not be allowed to watch live non-BBC content without the threat of legal action? You can't even watch live non-UK channels without the BBC requiring you to pay for it. Thieves and scumbags!