TV Licence

[Stewart]

I have no TV but watch the news, weather etc on computer as well as using bbc iplayer. I regularly get a notice from the licencing authority telling me that if I have a receiver (including computer) that can receive "live" tv then I must buy a licence. Now I have tried several things to see what is "live". My digital radio plays the same programme slightly later than my FM radio so the digital radio cannot be "live". I was in away at New Year and both watched and listened to the Vienna New Year concert, it was "live" on FM radio, slightly later on digital radio and later still on TV so that was not "live", The news and weather from bbc on the computer are also later than those on a tv. Does anyone know what "live" really means? Thank you.

[Andrew Gabriel]

Transmission and processing delays (more obvious with digital than analogue) would not prevent it still counting as live.

I recall reading that "live" in this context means receiving any part of a programme whilst the programme is still being broadcast, but I don't know where that came from.

I think you have to make sure you don't receive a program until the broadcast of it has finished.

[The Natural Philosopher]

endlessly discussed elsewhere.

The conclusion being that 'live' means that the WHOLE program is not buffered anywhere. Or in practical terms, you cant halfway through go back and watch it from the start.

In short, technically, you need a license.

[Andrew Gabriel]

Quick browse of the tv licensing website says much the same; for it not to count as "live", you mustn't start receiving it until after the broadcast has finished. (Also note that it's the receiving of it and not the listening to it which needs a license.)

[Bob Eager]

Mere sophistry. Still "live" although the use of the word "live" is a mistake by whoever used it!

So, "as it's being broadcast" is the critical thing. The slight digital delay wouldn't count unless you tried with an expensive lawyer.

Also useful...

"Watching TV on the internet You need to be covered by a licence if you watch TV online at the same time as it's being broadcast on conventional TV in the UK or the Channel Islands.

Video recorders and digital recorders like Sky+ You need a licence if you record TV as it's broadcast, whether that's on a conventional video recorder or digital box.

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 gone out 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.

Mobile phones A licence covers you to watch TV as it's broadcast on a mobile phone, whether you're at home or out and about. If you are covered by a valid licence at the address where you live, you will be licensed to use any device powered solely by its own internal batteries outside the home too."

[Fredxx]

The law uses the words similar to "capable of receiving broadcasts". Therefore if there are live broadcast on the 'net, your system will be capable of receiving then, and hence you theoretically need a licence.

[Yellow]

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, true.

The burden of proof is on you to show that the requisite plugins are not installed etc etc.

The whole license system and legislation is possibly nonsense, but that statement about the legal position is not.

[Terry Fields]

AIUI the programmes go out in what is called 'transport stream' (.ts) format. For subsequent replay, they have to be reprocessed into the relevant file formats (mpeg, etc), and they are not processed until the live programmes have finished. The delay in doing this is about 1 to 2 hours.

[Toby]

Unless you have a stream of data containg a live TV program being fired at your computer, and the software on your computer is decodng it, then your computer in not capable of recieving live TV.

[Man at B&Q]

0a7$du3$ [e-mail]...

If your TV is turned off, it's not capable of receiving live TV. You still need a license. Get the idea?

MBQ

[Yellow]

Is so.

That is nonsense because any "out the box" computer will be able to "receive" TV without additional software because a browser and flash is all you need.

Lots of rubbish is written about whether or not you need a TV licence but if you are not "watching live" TV, simply put, you do not.

[The Natural Philosopher]

neglecting the execrable grammar, that is simply not true.

By that ruling, as long as I keep within a speed limit, my car is not capable of exceeding it.

[The Natural Philosopher]

messagenews:hii0a7$du3$ [e-mail]...

Exactly.

That definition has been tested in law sometime ago IIRC. people using TVS PURELY fr computer monitors on their ataris etc, were advised to fill the antenna socket with araldite etc, in order to show that they were INCAPABLE of reception of off-air signals.

Assuming they were using RGB, and not some kind of PAL modulated carrier.

[Clive George]

Which most folks using ataris etc were. Most TVs only had aerial in.

[Tim W]

Man at B&Q wibbled on Tuesday 12 January 2010 15:39

Not true - assuming it is *always* turned off it does not need a license. It's not even necessary to disconnect it and put it in a cupboard, although it helps your story should you be foolish enough to let an inspector in your house.

I forget the edge case where you only use the TV for watching DVDs...

[The Natural Philosopher]

That depends on whether you are relying on common sense, or the strict letter of the law.

A computer with an internet connection and flash or moonlight installed is, within the definition of the act 'apparatus capable of receiving live TV or Radio'

You are relying on the fact that it is not its PRIMARY purpose, unlike, say, a radio or TV set, as defence.

That has not been found to work well for people arrested for e.g. carrying hunting knives to skin rabbits with, or even carving knives to carve the sunday roast with.Or even baseball bats, allegedly to hit balls with.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, but YOUR household does, since it contains the requisite apparatus. The law is written or interptreted that way to forestall the situation were the TV goes off the moment someone knocks on the front door. Claiming you have a TV but never use it, is not considered sufficient defence.

[Tim W]

The Natural Philosopher wibbled on Tuesday 12 January 2010 16:40

you knew what I meant...

Anyway...

The household does not need a license either under these conditions. Quote from

"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."

That's a surprisingly succinct statement, given who it's from. Now, we could go back to the Act(s) itself, but if that's what TV Licensing say, I think it's safe to assume that it's a currently accepted interpretation of the Act(s) by the only people who have an interest in busting you or I.

Nothing there about installed (but not used to watch live TV) equipment or stored equipment capable of doing the same. There is no need to be aralditing your aerial inputs either.

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher saying something like:

That's be that downloaded pron?