Under-cupboard DAB radio

[The Other Mike]

But can you legally do that if you don't have a tv licence?

[Ian Jackson]

In message , The Other Mike writes

Of course you can. This is a regular discussion point. You only need a TV licence to watch or record TV.

[The Other Mike]

So listening to TV and not viewing a picture is ok without a licence then?

If that's the case how come the registered blind only get a 50% reduction on the cost of their tv licence and not 100%?

[Dave Liquorice]

He he, I'm not convinced either. I can't quickly find the real, legal, wording of the TV Licence or what the actual requirements/exclusions are, only woolly, open to interpretation, verbiage.

The TVLA site does use the expression "to watch or record TV" but what does that *really* mean? Is it just some PR/Marketing/Web author type interpretation of the legal wording, thus not worth anything? Have the rules been relaxed? At one time the licence wibbled on about "installed" and "receiving apparatus", so a DTTV Rx used only for radio reception *would* require a TV licence.

[Ian Jackson]

In message , The Other Mike writes

If your equipment can't show you pictures, yes.

This because their equipment is (traditionally) capable of showing TV pictures. Other persons in the house could watch it. But if they use equipment which doesn't (and cannot) display TV pictures, it is highly debatable whether they need a licence.

says: "You don't need a TV Licence

- If you have a digital box used to produce sounds only.

- Provided that it can't display TV programmes." Note the word "display". Any normal English speaker would understand this as "display pictures". You don't "display" sounds. Deliberately 'woolly'? Maybe!

A problem may arise if the STB also has record facilities (eg, is a 'PVR'). The user may genuinely only want to record radio programmes but, of course, when recording TV sound, the complete TV programme (both sound and vision) would be recorded. It could then be argued that a TV licence is required - even if the user has no intention of making (or making use of) any recordings which will eventually produce pictures. But somehow I feel that any prosecution would be highly unlikely, and the likelihood of it being successful even less.

[Ian Jackson]

By itself, a digital STB cannot possibly reproduce TV pictures. By itself, it does not require a TV licence.

I potential problem arises if a set-top box can also record. Regardless of the user's honest intention only to use the recorded audio signals, strictly speaking, the 'installation' should have a TV licence. But somehow I feel that the chances of any successful prosecution would be extremely low (especially if there was no TV set in the house).

[Dave Liquorice]

author

That's precisely why I'd like to see the exact legal wording. There are so many badly drafted regulations and laws about these days. That the interpretation can vary wildly depending on your view point or background.

[Dave Liquorice]

Ah that's pretty clear and in such an obvoius place (not)...

Agreed, that together with the phrase "to watch or record TV" indicates that the rules have changed. Any box that can record a station, as it is broadcast, would require a licence even if it doesn't have a display itself.