TV License and Broadband?

A TV licence covers live broadcasts, so watching on the computer (iplayer etc) is fine if it isn't a live broadcast. 

Dear James,

That is more or less what the wording is on the TV License authority web pages. "Live streaming" seems to be the point, rather than watching a delayed relay of something after the first broadcast such as using the BBC iPlayer, though I last used that for the Victorian Farm series a couple of years ago now. The iPlayer is removed from the programs on the PC.

But what got me a bit worried - a £1000 fine would be utterly ruinous here - is the there is always the possibility to use the PC for live streaming of a live broadcast, though I do not have it configured to do this now. But it would be no long job to set it up to do so again.

It seems crazy that what is quite useful - Broadband Internet - for sending uncompressed photographs with emails and so on, could potentially also get me into trouble over live-streaming TV broadcasts. If there is any doubt, then I'll revert to dial-up, as I have no interest in watching TV or paying for a License.

Call me tight, call me cautious, but there it is!

ATB from George

Hi George,

I'm not sure how the law stands but i do remember reading some information somewhere that if you have any means of watching TV (BBC) whether on a PC or mobilephone even if it's through BBC i player, then you are required to have a license.

But as you say, it all seems rather patchy as to what is breaking the law.

One would think that all the information required will be on a TV license application form.

regards, Steve

I think, I'll have to get a dial-up USB modem, and have done with it then.

Still I find little of interest on the internet apart from my emails, and sometimes the Forum [both would be easy enough on dial-up] if I ignored the possibility of viewing photos. I use Skype, which would be a casualty with dial-up. Better to do without Skype than get a £1000 fine though.

ATB from George

Not really George, i feel exactly the same way. I don't have a TV either and have no intentions of purchasing one in any near future too!

regards, Steve

Some info here:-

http://www.tomski.com/2008/01/...ou_might_still.shtml

Seems like a re-think is required, perhaps a cheaper Internet TV licence?

Why you should loose your BB connection, and have to revert to DU seems a little out of order IMO.

There must be a way of keeping a decent internet connection and not have to pay for a TV fee.

FRom the TV Licence website: "Many TV channels are now available to watch over the internet. If you’re watching programmes on a computer or laptop as they're being shown on TV, then you need a TV Licence. However, you don’t need to be covered by a licence if you’re only using ‘on-demand’ services to watch programmes after they have been shown on TV. So, you need a licence to watch any channel live online, but you wouldn’t need one to use BBC iPlayer to catch up on an episode of a programme you missed, for example."

My italics but it seems clear enough. You only need a licence if you actually watch a tv programme as it is being transmitted. The issue is not whether you PC can receive tv programmes but whether you watch them on your PC at the time they are transmitted.

George,

Please DO NOT dispose of your broadband connection. I can state categorically that you do not require a TV license IF YOU DO NOT WATCH TV. It's as simple as that. Owning TV receiving equipment such as a TV set, DVD recorder or PC etc. does not place you under any legal obligation to purchase a license. The ABILITY to watch TV is irrelevant - it's only if you actually do watch it that you require a license. I know this from personal experience. My wife and I own a TV set but we never watch broadcast TV, it is used solely as a monitor for watching DVD's. Up until last year we had however always purchased a license, believing that as we owned a TV set we were reqiuired to do so. Money is very tight for us as we are currently out of work, so when we had the last renewal reminder I telephoned the licensing authority to explain the situation. I was told that as we do not watch TV, we do not require a license, irrespective of whether or not we own TV receiving equipment. A form was forwarded to us to make a declaration to that effect, and we were told that an inspector may call round just to verify that we did not watch TV (which has not happened yet). Indeed, when out of curiosity I asked how an inspector could possibly verify that we did not watch TV, since for all they knew I could do so a few minutes after the inspector left, I was told that he couldn't! It's only if they actually CAUGHT us watching when they turned up that we'd be in trouble! If you are still worried then please just telephone the licensing authority yourself and let them explain the situation as they did to me.

Best wishes,

Peter

Time to write a clear letter outlining my situation to the TV License authority, I think! Asking for a simple explanation of the situation.

Also if there were a Radio License, then I would happily pay enough to have all the current BBC Radio Services - even the ones I never listen to. I only ever listen to Radio Four and Radio Three, so most of it passes me by ...

But the TV is something I baulk at. I find that it is just so much brainwashing mindless drivel, like some ghastly toxic scum that floats on the top of the solid, well intentioned output of the serious radio services.

Myself, I would not be upset if TV broadcasting simply stopped, and I would do anything, including disconnecting from Broadband, rather than make a contribution to its continuation.

ATB from George

You are fine watching iplayer on a PC, however if you do not renew your licence be prepared for a torrent of shit from them, inlcuding multiple letters, visits and phone calls.

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/

George,

I agree with you completely about the state of TV. We haven't watched for over 10 years now! I sometimes miss a few good documentaries and natural history programs, but certainly not enough to shell out the license fee for.

Going totally off-topic, I've had to downgrade to Denon DM38DAB micro-system + Wharfedale Diamond 9.1 speakers (after owning,at one time CDS3/XPS2, 252/Supercap, Olive 250 and IBL's as you may possibly just remember from a few years back). Still a surprisingly musical and enjoyable system though, and I don't feel any great loss as I can still ENJOY my music. Best of luck with your intended Nait 3 and home brewed speakers! (I once used a slimline 92/90, which is basically just the Nait 3 split between 2 boxes, into IBL's and it was superb. Can't think why I ever bothered to change!).

Peter

Dear Peter,

I agree that the documentaries and natural history programmes used to a be a TV highlight for me. But mostly the general programming became intollerable for me about ten years ago, and in 2002, I gave my Television away, rather than renew the license.

Off-topic but not serious! I had a Nait Three as my first Naim amp, and truth to tell, I had no criticism of it. It converted me to Naim so that was good! Of course if you compared it with a 52 and 180 there was more control, and some exquisite detail for extra, but I got it wrong in thinking that I was enjoying the music better for the extra quality on hand, and made some fair upgrades over a few years.

With such a long break - nearly two years now since I parted with my Royd Minstrels, the 72, and 140 - I would think that the Nait Three will be as pleasing today as it was in 1999! I would never be tempted to something more expensive now! And I am also sure that my single driver speakers will divide opinion as surely as any great musician always does! Some people will love them, and some others will be very polite about them - wondering internally how I could tollerate them! I actually am aiming for a speaker with less than usual bass-line presence! Saves worrying about annoying the neighbours, and the ears soon adjust!

Best wishes from George

George,

I hope Richard will forgive this, as I realise this discussion should really be taking place in the Hi-Fi section and it's entirely my fault, but I wanted to say a few things.......

I think you are on to something really important and exciting with your aims with single driver speakers. It is something which I have very rarely (if ever) seen mentioned in the hi-fi press, (which I used to avidly read but have not done so for many years). It is a phenomenon which I have been aware of since my early hi-fi days in the 70's, but something I've never really managed to crystallise my thoughts on or get to grips with. I can best sum it up as musical ability of a replay system as opposed to hi-fi ability. This in itself is well discussed and nothing new - but the phenomenon I am speaking of is the number of occaisions where I have noticed that very humble replay systems, which have certainly not been of hi-fi quality, seem able to produce a very direct emotional connection with the music, in a way that proper hi-fi systems seem incapable of. Very often these "systems" have been cheap mono record players or radios employing single driver loudspeakers. It almost seems as though, in some circumstances, there is an inverse relationship between hi-fi ability and musical communication. It is an odd phenomenon, but absolutely unmistakable when you encounter it. Whether or not the single driver speakers employed are largely responsible for this I don't know, but to me it does seem likely. It is an effect which cannot be characterised easily - it has nothing to do with speed, dynamics, resolution, detail, low colouration etc. It is simply that the music connects with one in an extremely direct way - without any of the hi-fi nonsense to clutter up the experience. We have a mono Pure radio in the kitchen (broadly similar I believe to your Tivoli but probably not as good) and this is incredibly musical. As an experiment I ran a connection from the headphone out socket on our Netbook to it and played a few music files. The musical connection was unmistakable and superior in many ways to our main Denon Micro-System - which is certainly very musical. I was almost tempted to sell the Denon and just use the Pure radio for music played from the Netbook - eventually getting a USB DAC - similar to your own current set-up. What stopped me was the feeling that I wouldn't be able to live comfortably long-term with the lack of scale and sheer lack of realism to the sound when compared to the larger system. Musically there would be no problem at all for me. I am still tempted by this prospect!

As for your speakers, they should be magnificent if they sound something like the Tivoli "writ large".All the musical directness but with added scale! They should certainly divide opinions - you will be making something very significantly different sounding to the "norm" - indeed if most people liked them then you will almost certainly have ended up with something too normal and will have failed in your aims! I am confident however that you will succeed in making something superbly musical.

Best wishes,

Peter  

I can attest to a whole torrent of shit but managing by exception is a cheaper way to extract any fees due from punters rather than going through the whole list of TV licence owners.

Peter is absolutely correct. You need a TV licence only if you watch television (in whatever format) as it is being broadcast. Do not get rid of your broadband; it is not necessary.

One word of warning though. As garyi and Roy T say, you will get lot of threatening letters as they do not understand the concept that somebody might rather listen to music, read, or watch a DVD than watch television. By the way, when you buy a TV, the shop send details to the TV Licencing people.

We haven’t watched TV or had a licence for the past 18 years and have no interest in doing so. However I do have a 42” plasma screen and DVD5 connected up to the Naim hi-fi and I watch a lot of DVDs. I have spent the past 5 years trying to stop them sending me threatening letters, including getting my MP to write to them, so far all to no avail. Some of these letters are very intimidating, for example giving details of what to expect when you have to appear in court, and they take the default position that you are breaking the law. I also really objected to being told I had to contact them every year or two to confirm I still don’t need a licence. I don’t have a pilot’s licence either and I don’t get all this hassle about that! After intervention from my MP I eventually I got a letter saying they have updated their records to note I don’t need a TV licence and I don’t need to contact them again to confirm this. However, this didn’t stop the threatening letters and I still get one a month! I just wish they would come and visit, as they keep threatening to do.

Rant over.

Chris

Thanks for your helpful replies - all. I now have an idea how to write pre-emptively to the TV Licensing Authority. I sincerely hope to avoid the phenomenon of being once a month being accused of being a liar, but I suppose that might be the consequence of not being a regular sheep!

Off topic, and I reckon Richard would rather we discussed home made speakers in the Cell than the Hifi Room. We would not want to give people ideas ... But I am certain that mine will work from the musical stance, and will not be able to be classified as Hifi at all. The Tivoli certainly cannot be, and yet it is amazing. I leave it on at night and sometimes am awoken by the most amazing music! The poor little thing can get a bit unstuck on a signal with massive bass, because then it will distort, but mostly it is more than fine for me. I remember we had a wonderful school gramophone which had a massive open baffle with a single ten inch driver, and though it had no respectable bass, and was not particularly articulate, I have yet to come across any so called Hifi that was half as compelling as that old valve amp powered mono single driver set - never to be forgotten, and far better than our "stereo" at home ...

ATB from George 

That experience with your school gramophone perfectly illustrates my point George. I am convinced that as we climb the ladder to become "more hi-fi", something is also irretrievably lost, that elusive "direct connection" with the music. In our quest for realism, we somehow lose an important connection between our brain and the music. I am sure that single drivers and psycho-acoustics play a part in this. It is a complex subject, and one that is largely unexplored, and certainly rarely discussed. It is possible that the phenomenon is far from being universal - perhaps only certain individuals perceive it. It may be relatively rare, and perhaps that's why it is seldom mentioned! For those of us that do perceive it, I think the whole matter of "hi-fi" is a curse in a way. We want it both ways - realistic lifelike sound and to be as connected with the music as we would experience at a real performance. Impossible for anyone of course, but perhaps a little more difficult for the likes of us!

Best wishes,

Peter

Does it have a tuner? If it does I believe you need a licence.

The question is rather more does the potential to stream live TV mean that a Broadband connection requires a TV License. I know that it is possible to disable any TV tuner of conventional analogue sort. I enquired when I parted with my TV, and the answer was certainly so back in 2002 when these things were more primitive, but in those days I had no VHSs or DVDs ...

ATB from George

PS: Peter, when the Jordans are done, and you will know, please try to visit for an audition! The thread will be here in the Rubber Room ...

Many thanks George. I'll follow the progress with mounting excitement - please do try to post progress reports / pictures along the way if you have time. Also look forward to hearing how you get on with the Nait 3 used with your iTunes source.

Peter

Yes George I know what the original question was about and it's an interesting one. My reply was to Chris's comment about his plasma screen.

Interesting stuff here.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/c...ics/technology-top8/

I suspect we'll be hearing more about this. For example why shouldn't you need a licence to watch BBC Iplayer? I record loads from the BBC but it's often on Iplayer before I watch it. What's the difference?

I still think it is made very clear that you need a licence only if you actually watch TV as it is being broadcast. Just having a piece of equipment in the house that has the potential do this does not require you to have a licence. Here are some direct quotes from their web site:

“If you watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV you must, by law, be covered by a TV Licence, no matter what device you're using.”

“You don't need a licence if you don't use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs”

Sounds pretty straightforward to me.

I don’t have an aerial or satelite dish so I don’t think I could pick up a signal even if I wanted to. I’ve no idea about the computer. I very occasionally catch up with the odd programme on BBC i-player and maybe I have the capability to watch programmes in real time. I have no idea; I’ve never tried. The way technology is changing so fast, I can’t imaging you need a licence just because something you own might be able to pick up live TV. Maybe my mobile phone can pick live TV. Again, I haven’t a clue as I use it just for phone calls and texts.

So, I don’t think you need to worry George. Though I was a bit concerned about your comment about "having functional receiving equipment in the home". Where did this come from?

Chris

It used to be the case that having a working TV in your house required a licence whether you watched it or not but it looks like that's been changed, I guess because of the new technology in many houses.

The extract below from the site http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16/ makes it pretty clear. 

"If you own or possess a television set without installing or using it as a TV receiver (e.g. you only use it to watch videos or DVDs, or as a monitor for a games console) then you don’t need a TV Licence.

If you don’t have a television set or have one but don’t use it to watch programmes as they are being shown on TV, we ask that you inform us this is the case, so that we can register it on our database to prevent unnecessary contact. An enquiry officer may call to verify this. This is necessary because when we make contact on these visits, a fifth of people are found to require a TV Licence. We believe that the fairest and most consistent approach is to visit addresses where TV Licensing is notified that no television set is used.

If, during a brief visit, an enquiry officer can verify that no licence is likely to be needed, he or she will stop any further contact to that address for two years for a residential address and three years for a business address."

What an educational site this is. I'm still surprised that you can legally use Iplayer without a licence.

"It used to be the case that having a working TV in your house required a licence whether you watched it or not"

When? In the early nineties (well before broadband and iPlayer) a mate of mine who never watched tv, had a television and a vhs player because he used to make a lot of vhs recordings of training courses he went on. He checked with the authorities and was told that as long as it wasn't plugged into an aerial when they showed up he'd be fine.

Dear Tom,

Your post - two up - has set my mind at rest. I shall write to the TVL Authority explaining the situation, and feel secure that so long as I never actually use the PC for live streamed TV then I am not breaking the law.

If it says "Don't walk on the grass," then I never do ...

ATB from George