VirginMedia Broadband Price Increase

I must admit that I do live in fear of him leaving them. He doesn't like his job any more, but he is a couple of years older than me, and would stand zero chance of getting employed elsewhere in today's economic climate, because of his age, so I figure that unless they get rid of him, he's there for the duration. He actually knows what he is about, but is a little too conscientious about getting customers' problems sorted, often carrying out work that he really ought to be calling other departments out to do. He has worked in most of those departments over the years, so has collected the expertise and equipment to do the remedial work, but it tends to put him behind on jobs, which then leaves him working late. He is very 'old school' on the customer service and satisfaction angle, as am I. I fear we are a dying breed ...

Arfa

Reply to
Arfa Daily
Loading thread data ...

Exactly my point. It is virtually impossible to prove that you have never used your equipment to watch TV (you cannot prove a negative) therefore you cannot win.

Clearly the prosecutors would not take their claims to court if the law was not on their side therefore we can assume that the law relates to ownership of equipment and not how it is used.

Reply to
altheim

Oh, it was easy if you genuinely hadn't, e.g. there was no way to plug an aerial in.

I would guess about 40% of the not guilty plea cases were found not guilty. This is probably more than should have been, but the prosecution were not very competent, and sometimes didn't offer any evidence at all, particularly if the defendant had a solicitor. I never saw a case which was caught by detector van.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

OK, Here it is:

"No person shall establish or use any station for wireless telegraphy or instal or use any apparatus for wireless telegraphy except under the authority of a licence in that behalf granted by the Postmaster General, and any person who establishes or uses any station for wireless telegraphy or instals or uses any apparatus for wireless telegraphy except under and in accordance with such a licence shall be guilty of an offence under this Act."

Except for specifying "in use" __as well__ as "establish" and "install" how is Mr Kraftee wrong?

Reply to
altheim

In article , altheim scribeth thus

Thats not too well written after a receiver is equipment for wireless telegraphy..

No mention of wireless telephony but telegraphy could mean digital...

suppose a wi-fi point could be construed a wireless telegraph transmitter;))..

The old 1949 act has been updated since..

Reply to
tony sayer

You missed the key bit "for wireless telegraphy"

If I install and use a VCR recorder only for playing prerecorded videos, then it wasn't installed or used for wireless telegraphy, and thus no licence is required. This is well established law.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

It's clear enough but what are the definitions of the words "station" and phrase "wireless telegraphy"?

IMHO "station" is referring to a "transmitting station" or anything designed to transmit and "wireless telegraphy" the transfer, without wires, of "information". On the latter point ISTR that case law has moved car radar speed detectors out of the scope of the WTA because no "information" was received by the detector.

They are and they are licenced under a type approval/general licence.

AFAIK there is only one bit of "wireless" equipment that is an offence to sell or posses and that is in band (Band IV and V) video senders.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

That's right. The "any apparatus" covers receivers too.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel
  • Vote on answer
  • posted

| | I am told by someone who works in TV/internet | that a tv licence is needed to watch it Live over the internet, | but its OK to watch old programmes on BBC iplayer without a TV | licence. | | [g]

That's right you're allowed to 'time slip' but not real time watching...

Reply to
Kráftéé
  • Vote on answer
  • posted

| > Go read the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1949 to see that you're 100% | > wrong. Actually, you only have to read the very first sentence of | > it. | >

| | OK, Here it is: | | "No person shall establish or use any station for wireless | telegraphy or instal or use any apparatus for wireless telegraphy | except under the authority of a licence in that behalf granted by | the Postmaster General, and any person who establishes or uses any | station for wireless telegraphy or instals or uses any apparatus | for wireless telegraphy except under and in accordance with such a | licence | shall be guilty of an offence under this Act." | | Except for specifying "in use" __as well__ as "establish" and | "install" how is Mr Kraftee wrong? | | -- | altheim

This is the bun fight & round & around we go.

Altheim he won't admit that the law states that, all he will now do is regurgitate his perception, his own personal interpretation completely ignoring the actual black & white.

Been thru it all for some exams several years ago, but not that long ago & I know it hasn't been amended that much because as sure as eggs is eggs if you posses one you will use it at some time or other.

Reply to
Kráftéé
  • Vote on answer
  • posted

| >> Go read the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1949 to see that you're | >> 100% wrong. Actually, you only have to read the very first | >> sentence of it. | >>

| >

| > OK, Here it is: | >

| > "No person shall establish or use any station for wireless | > telegraphy or instal or use any apparatus for wireless telegraphy | > except under the authority of a licence in that behalf granted by | > the Postmaster General, and any person who establishes or uses | > any station for wireless telegraphy or instals or uses any | > apparatus for wireless telegraphy except under and in accordance | > with such a licence | > shall be guilty of an offence under this Act." | >

| > Except for specifying "in use" __as well__ as "establish" and | > "install" how is Mr Kraftee wrong? | | You missed the key bit "for wireless telegraphy" | | If I install and use a VCR recorder only for playing prerecorded | videos, then it wasn't installed or used for wireless telegraphy, | and thus no licence is required. This is well established law. | | -- | Andrew Gabriel | [email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Sorry your VCR _recorder_ could land you in deep shit. Now if you had spent less & bought a video player that is a completely different kettle of fish.

Reply to
Kráftéé
  • Vote on answer
  • posted

| >>> Well I hammer mine on occasions & the only problem I get is | >>> from the slow servers where I'm getting the data from (20 - 30 | >>> GB over a 2-3 day period has not been unheard of a few times). | >>>

| >>> I could say P2P 24 hours day but the network I use had died a | >>> slow death only 3 world wide servers on the network where there | >>> used to be 50 or more, so I've got to look for pastures new. | >>> Unfortunately Torrents just don't want to work for me, | >>> different story sorry.. | >>>

| >>> Let's put it this way in the last year I have never heard of | >>> anybody being told that they have abused their unlimited | >>> service. So it's pretty good. The problem is with the | >>> helpdesk which you need unearthly skills to get them to sort | >>> out what you want them to, instead of them playing up because | >>> you've done something like turn the wifi off. They also have | >>> problems with words like contention but if a firm hand is used | >>> they can be guided, without to much, if any, swearing. | >>>

| >>>

| >>

| >>Bit of a cop out on that score, but when I have had any problems | >>with my Virgin BB, I just call my mate, who works for them on | >>field service. He then | >>just pops round to sort it for me. Very useful, as he has access | >>to technical people who listen to what the problem is, and are | >>then able to check stuff for him, right up to switch and trunk | >>level, and right down to street cab level. :-) | >>

| >>Arfa | >>

| >>

| > Same here .. problem is if he leaves the whole lot it seems will | > grind to a halt, there are precious few people who know what | > there're doing with this sort of equipment!... | > -- | > Tony Sayer | >

| >

| >

| I must admit that I do live in fear of him leaving them. He doesn't | like his job any more, but he is a couple of years older than me, | and would stand zero chance of getting employed elsewhere in | today's economic climate, because of his age, so I figure that | unless they get rid of him, he's there for the duration. He | actually knows what he is about, but is a little too conscientious | about getting customers' problems sorted, often carrying out work | that he really ought to be calling other departments out to do. He | has worked in most of those departments over the years, so has | collected the expertise and equipment to do the remedial work, but | it tends to put him behind on jobs, which then leaves him working | late. He is very 'old school' on the customer service and | satisfaction angle, as am I. I fear we are a dying breed ...

Make that more a unemployed breed. It always happens when stats get in the way of end user service, some companies even place 'quality standards' which are impossible to keep 100% if the stat is to be met so the customer service engineer who tries to satisfy the end users & keep to the quality standards fall even further behind. The funny thing is, when the crap hits the wall who are the employees they call to help them out....That's right the very ones who they're threatening with poor performance discplinary procedures & anything else they can dream up to try & force them out the door.

Reply to
Kráftéé

Yes, and if you wanted to be really pedantic you could argue that cable is not wireless. The Act of 1949 has, as you rightly point out, been updated - 1998 I think - but only to add a few extra clauses relating to payment, penalties etc. It has not altered anything in the first paragraph.

Reply to
altheim

Peculiarly, it's almost certainly spent more and bought a video player.

Reply to
Clive George
  • Vote on answer
  • posted

Not when I last saw them in the shops

Reply to
Kráftéé

If you owned a video cassette player - as opposed to a video cassette recorder - I might agree with you, but if your VCR is capable of receiving broadcast material then you become liable. That is clearly stated in the very paragraph which you referred us to so I fail to see why you think your case is supported by 'established law'.

Reply to
altheim

You need the licence if it is near live, whatever "near live" means in court.

Reply to
dennis

I guess that is there because any defence lawyer worth their salt would immediately point out that with any television there is a delay of some sort between the precise moment of an event and the moment the same event appears on the television screen.

In old analogue days this delay would be very short but now with digits, sybchronisers, multiplexes, multi-hop geosynchronous satellite distribution etc etc, the delay between an event happening and it appearing on screen can be many seconds.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

I've sat through around 30 cases in magistrates court, and heard it stated there many times. A defence solicitor will (where possible and relevant) show that the apparatus was not "installed or used for wireless telegraphy", but installed and used for some other purpose, and thus does not come under the Act. Try reading the above again -- I can only assume you aren't reading it carefully enough, as that is exactly what it says.

Reply to
Andrew Gabriel

In article , Andrew Gabriel scribeth thus

So strictly speaking for that bit of "Apparatus" then you need a licence issued by the Postmaster General..

Shirley he'll be redundant too what with the rise of e-mail;!...

Reply to
tony sayer

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.