b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Protest! » Post 965825 | Search
This is a question Protest!

Sit-ins. Walk-outs. Smashing up the headquarters of a major political party. Chaining yourself to the railings outside your local sweet shop because they changed Marathons to Snickers. How have you stuck it to The Man?

(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 12:24)
Pages: Popular, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

No
They need to be paid by people who watch broadcast television, not just the BBC.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 16:40, 1 reply)
I know they need to be
What I can't see is why they don't make TVs that can't recieve the BBC for those poeple who don't want to watch it. Admittedly you've got other things like airwave rental, but you could at least make the fee smaller in those cases.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 16:44, closed)
They could make the BBC subscription-based
But then not everybody would pay the subscription.

So either the programme-making budget would be slashed, or the subscription would go up, either way you get a lot less for your money.

Then even fewer people would pay the subscription.

And so on.

Until we end up like Australia or the USA.

Some people might argue that there would be nothing wrong with that, but I would be willing to poke them all in the eye.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 16:58, closed)
Frankly yes, that would be worse.
If I had a TV I wouldn't mind paying the licence to escape the adverts, but the OP was about the harassing and threatening techinques the licencing authority uses to try and get money out of people who don't owe them any.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 16:59, closed)
I entirely agree
The BBC is one of the few things which Britain can still be proud of. The government is doing all it can to break up the corporation, but I think it should be strengthened, if anything.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 19:39, closed)
the licence
is for you to install and use equipment to receive tv signals as they are broadcast. It has nothing to do with watching BBC.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 17:18, closed)
Out of curiosity, as you seem to know more than me, do they make televisions...
... or large television like flat scree monitors that can't receive signals but have the same connections and such? That may be a reeeeeeally stupid question on my part but I don't know about connections needed for games consoles and the likes.

Also, does that then mean that you could watch, without a license, programmes on websites such as 4od as they are not being broadcast and received as they would be on a telly?
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 17:34, closed)
coincidently
...I've just had one through the door (despite also not owning, sorry using a TV for receiving broadcast).
It states that even if you use the internet to view TV 'as it is broadcast' then you need a licence.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 18:13, closed)
In Ireland
you need a licence for a TV or Radio. I solved the problem by nailing two signs outside my driveway. One stating Trespassers will be prosecuted and the other Road closed. Happy days.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 23:38, closed)
Yes you do. You need one if you use a mobile phone for that purpose too.
"You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder."

www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check/index.aspx?WT.mc_id=r054#link1
(, Fri 12 Nov 2010, 5:51, closed)
yes
and you can watch the i-player.
(, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 21:57, closed)
My Samsung SyncMaster 2493HM has an HDMI input.
So yes.
(, Fri 12 Nov 2010, 2:10, closed)
Yeah, these devices exist.
You could probably get away with it if you killed the receiver somehow (glue the ariel port?).
From my reading of it, on demand services are ok without a license, but live streaming isn't.
(, Fri 12 Nov 2010, 7:14, closed)

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Pages: Popular, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1