Slashdot Mirror

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/

Stop funding this shit. You don't need a TV licence, even if you watch TV. It's simply a case of treating TV licensing like any other sales organisation - bin their unwanted junk mail, however threatening (it's a joke once you learn to see through the "if"s and "may"s), close the door on their unwanted salespeople. Detector vans are a myth - the only way they get a conviction is if you voluntarily let them into your house and voluntarily sign a confession - so don't do that.

"...We have a fleet of detector vans, plus, our enforcement officers have access to hand-held detection devices capable of detecting a magnetic field when a TV is switched on. In fact, we catch an average of over 1,000 people watching TV without a licence every day."

...but they don't do it using this supposed hitech equipment. No-one has ever been prosecuted on evidence from one of these near-mythical infernal devices. They send people round with clipboards to wheedle out a signed confession. It appears to be every two years round here. You are not under any legal requirement to cooperate with them in any way, and they can't get in the house without a search warrant. Which they don't use, because it requires their fabricating evidence. And they have to leave your peoperty if requested, so I just tell them to fur cough.

FIND:
http://tvlicensing.biz/
RR

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/detection/

Pretty straight forward really.

For more info:

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/

It leaks out the same way the broadcast signal came in, my anonymous friend.

Of course, you can box your antenna in a faraday cage too, that'll work...but your reception may not be so crisp. Read some more of the www.tvlicensing.biz site you quoted to learn about that.

Err, yes they can. The detector vans work by picking up the signal generated by the local osciallator in your tv's tuning circuit (well, maybe not yours :). Doesn't matter if it's a crt, flat screen, whatever.

They can even work out which channel you're watching, because the frequency output by the local oscillator is always 39.5MHz above the frequency of the broadcast channel.

Of course it's a bit different now digital telly has arrived, but the principle remains the same, and if you've got satellite/cable etc. you should be in their database anyway. In fact, whatever method you use to receive TV short of streaming over the 'net, there's going to be some giveaway signal at some point. This site is pretty informative:

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/detection/

As I understand the UK licensing (licencing) law, you would not have to pay a licence fee if you do not have a device capable of receiving or recording TV programming. If you have a DVD player with no recording capability and a monitor without a tuner you may be exempt from licencing requirements.
See http://www.kevinboone.com/tv_licence.html for a but more information.
Also see http://www.tvlicensing.biz/info_on_tvlicensing/
IANAL.

In the UK, yes. A licence costing £120 or so a year. Don't know the exact current amount, as I haven't had one for three years now (No TV) . If you don't have a licence, you get monthly threats sent by the tv licensing scum, and they send "inspectors" round to see if you have a TV and trick you into signing a confesssion so you cna be fined in court. When my inspector came round I told him to fuck off. And photographed him, which he didn't like... More about the TV licence here

Are you saying that you're routinely visited by guys to check if you have a TV license?!? For air broadcast?!?!?!?

Not routinely, but there are people who work as inspectors, and they do visit households. The licensing authority have a list of all the residential addresses UK, and they have a list of all the addresses to which current licenses have been issued. They do visits to addresses where the license has lapsed and the occupant doesn't respond to letters prompting them to renew, and possibly occasional spot checks on other addresses which are unlicensed. There also used to be a radio license at one time, but they don't collect that any more.

What's the difference between that and inspecting your computer to check if you have illegal stuff in it? What kind of law allows that?!?

Wireless and Telegraphy Act 1949 (as ammended), the Broadcasting Act 1990 and the Wireless and Telegraphy (Television Licence Fees) Regulations 1997. Those kind of laws.

The UK Parliament passed laws which say that operating television receiving equipment is an activity restricted by law, and that you need a license to do it

In my country you need a judge to order it. Nobody can enter your house if you do not give your permission (or have a judge order to do so).

Licensing inspectors don't have a right of entry. They can knock on your door and interview you. They will ask to inspect any equipment that you admit to owning, but you aren't obliged to let them do so. If you refuse access, and they have good reason to suspect that you do have equipment, then they can go to the local Magistrate's court and ask for a warrant.

The first of these leaflets (from an anti-license campaigning group) describes the inspection and prosecution process in some detail.

The BBC stinks. It is just legalised theft. What do we get in return for our £120 a year ? End to end crap programs and adverts. Yes, adverts. The breaks between programmes are used to advertise other BBC radio or TV programmes. These adverts are much more repetitive and annoying than the advertisements on the commercial channels.

If you don't pay your TV licence fee then you will end up with a criminal record. Read about it hear :

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/

That was in the past. Nowadays it's simpler, quicker, and cheaper to check all a list of all homes in the UK against homes with a TV liscence. If you don't have a licence, you're suspected of dodging the licence fee.

More infomation

In the past they used detection vehicles, which tune in to a specific frequency that is automaticly output by all TVs, by a device that is called the local oscillator. It's then a simple matter to cross-refference "Houses With a TV", with "Houses Paying TV Liscence Tax". The ones that arenn't paying tax get a visit...

That was in the past. Nowadays it's simpler, quicker, and cheaper to check all a list of all homes in the UK against homes with a TV liscence. If you don't have a licence, you're suspected of dodging the licence fee. This isn't actually too harsh, as every single person I know has a TV. (Do you know anyone who doesn't?)

You don't have to pay the fee, though, especially if you dont have a TV. If you do have a TV set but use it for games, or for DVDs, you don't need a licence either.

http://www.tvlicensing.biz is a very good resource for more infomation. If you do find yourself in a situation where you have to deal with the TVLA, contact the Citizen's Advice Bureau, as they will provide much better advice than slashdot, or the Net.

Wanna know what I think? 50p a day for one of the world's best public TV services really isn't bad. Add that to the other BBC projects such as their massive website and their radio services, and their intitiative to digitise their archives and make them available for viewing... it's one of the few things that makes me proud to be British...

I said you wouldn't be able to give me a good reason, and I was right.

I pay for the school system and I don't have kids - or intend to - but I don't make a song and dance about it. I pay for people with children to receive tax benefits but I don't whine.

The education of our children is far more important than television, in my opinion. As is the elimination of poverty. In addition, these payments are made through *general taxation*. Think about it - the infrastructure for taxation and enforcement already exists. Why do we need a seperate, really rather sinister body (TV Licencing), enforcing this seperate tax/licence when general taxation would remove millions of pounds in the cost of running TV Licencing, as well as ensure that *everybody* paid for this national service (not just those with TVs) and that the payment would be fairer (rich pay more, poor pay less)? Hmm?

Eat the cost and recognise the benefits to society.

I don't and probably will never recognise a major enough benefit to society to justify this tax/licence. It's simply a difference of opinion, and I strongly believe it should be scrapped.

Or why don't you and your 2999 fellow petition signatories get on the streets and march?

The people opposing the war in Iraq thought they could influence government policy by taking to the streets in their millions. They were wrong. Maybe we're intelligent enough to realise that a few thousand of us marching will do bugger all to change this, and lobbying efforts are a better use of our time and resources.

I said you wouldn't be able to give me a good reason, and I was right.

I pay for the school system and I don't have kids - or intend to - but I don't make a song and dance about it. I pay for people with children to receive tax benefits but I don't whine.

The education of our children is far more important than television, in my opinion. As is the elimination of poverty. In addition, these payments are made through *general taxation*. Think about it - the infrastructure for taxation and enforcement already exists. Why do we need a seperate, really rather sinister body (TV Licencing), enforcing this seperate tax/licence when general taxation would remove millions of pounds in the cost of running TV Licencing, as well as ensure that *everybody* paid for this national service (not just those with TVs) and that the payment would be fairer (rich pay more, poor pay less)? Hmm?

Eat the cost and recognise the benefits to society.

I don't and probably will never recognise a major enough benefit to society to justify this tax/licence. It's simply a difference of opinion, and I strongly believe it should be scrapped.

Or why don't you and your 2999 fellow petition signatories get on the streets and march?

The people opposing the war in Iraq thought they could influence government policy by taking to the streets in their millions. They were wrong. Maybe we're intelligent enough to realise that a few thousand of us marching will do bugger all to change this, and lobbying efforts are a better use of our time and resources.

I said you wouldn't be able to give me a good reason, and I was right.

I pay for the school system and I don't have kids - or intend to - but I don't make a song and dance about it. I pay for people with children to receive tax benefits but I don't whine.

The education of our children is far more important than television, in my opinion. As is the elimination of poverty. In addition, these payments are made through *general taxation*. Think about it - the infrastructure for taxation and enforcement already exists. Why do we need a seperate, really rather sinister body (TV Licencing), enforcing this seperate tax/licence when general taxation would remove millions of pounds in the cost of running TV Licencing, as well as ensure that *everybody* paid for this national service (not just those with TVs) and that the payment would be fairer (rich pay more, poor pay less)? Hmm?

Eat the cost and recognise the benefits to society.

I don't and probably will never recognise a major enough benefit to society to justify this tax/licence. It's simply a difference of opinion, and I strongly believe it should be scrapped.

Or why don't you and your 2999 fellow petition signatories get on the streets and march?

The people opposing the war in Iraq thought they could influence government policy by taking to the streets in their millions. They were wrong. Maybe we're intelligent enough to realise that a few thousand of us marching will do bugger all to change this, and lobbying efforts are a better use of our time and resources.

Have you noticed how we Brits defend the BBC? We generally don't mind paying the license fee

You misrepresenting literally millions of Brits, including me. I despise the licence fee. Here's a website with plenty more Brits that hate the licence fee, and proof of TV Licensing's frankly disgusting scare tactic propoganda. So please, for the last and final time, STOP MISREPRESENTING other people's views.

I don't watch much TV but when I do it's usually BBC.

That's OK; you pay for the BBC. When I watch, it's usually not the BBC. Nor do I mind adverts in between shows. Why should I pay for the BBC? Give me a GOOD reason. I bet you can't.

I have BBC radio 4 on most of the time I am in my flat because they have some truly excellent programmes.

Me too. I agree that Radio 4 has some good programmes that I like. It could easily survive WITHOUT the licence fee! Either through subscription, or even if the licence fee were part of general taxation (making it much fairer, paid by truly everybody, and drastically lowering the costs of enforcing the TV tax), but still Radio 4 would survive just fine.

You get someone liek this on your doorstep:
http://www.tvlicensing.biz/
Incredibly, quite sensible people can be brainwashed into defending this system.

am I gona need a new TV license if I get one?

ps: the Brits are insane.

If you use or install television receiving equipment to receive or record television programme services you are required by law to have a valid TV Licence.

A licence is not needed to own a TV receiver. A licence is needed only for the reception of broadcast television signals. You could have a TV plugged into an ariel and tuned in, and not be in violation of the law as long as you never used it. However, the TV licencing authority (a private company run by Capita) will assume that you have and use a TV and will prosecute anyone who doesn't have a TV licence. They usually rely on a signed confession for this, and drop prosecutions against people who fight back in court. Have a look at the Abolish the TV licence campaign.

Steve.

Europeans typically pay about the equivalent of a modern day 19" color TV per year per TV in their household for the right to have and watch that TV.
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!
This post is completely incorrect, in almost every detail!
1. This applies only in the UK AFAIK, and certainly does not apply across Europe.
2. The license fee as payable for an entire household. In my house we have 5 televisions, and one license.
3. The fee covers the reception of public and commercial broadcast television. Merely owning a TV set does NOT make you liable for a license fee.
The one element of truth in this may be the price - we pay £116/year for a license. That may cover the cost of a cheap TV. However UK citizens in general do not feel that this is particularly bad value for money. While it may be expensive on a per-channel basis, the quality of the channels is very high, and there are many additional services provided by the BBC, such as the excellent bbc.co.uk, the UK's most visited website IIRC.
For anyone wanting to know more about the subject, try these sources of real facts:
TV Licensing
BBCi, The UK's #1 most visited website
and to balance the debate:
BBC Resistance - the campaign to abolish the TV License
and for a laugh:
19" Televisions for under £116

Well, i could give you a massive rant with about a million and one reasons why I don't support the licence fee such as TV Licensing's aggressive bullying tactics that enforce it, or its inherent unfairness to the British people because people outside Britain get the BBC's benefits for free, but I won't.

Basically it's just a matter of choice. ie. I should have the choice to pay whoever I want for whatever I want to watch. The licence fee is like a mandatory tax on CD-Rs that goes to pay the RIAA, except that it's British, and it goes to pay the BBC, an organization whose benefits are felt the world over! Extremely unfair to the British people, IMHO.

Read www.tvlicensing.biz for more information, if you want it.