Re: Illegal in Canada!

[Terry]

Interesting that there ever was a radio licence requirement in what was then 'The Dominion of Canada'! Good question! Wonder if there is a cache (treasure trove!) of antique radios in some 'Canadian Crown Assets' warehouse somewhere that we could put a bid on? Personally I doubt it. The RCMP, generally, are pretty sensible and reasonable.

Musta been back when a 'Wirelss/Radio Receieving Licence' which IIRC cost a few shillings in UK was required. Although I wasn't aware, Canada must have followed suit and also required such licences. Can you imagine every kid running around today with a portable walkman/radio having to buy a licence? Exactly!

Today, in the UK a radio receieving licence is no longer required but a TV receiving licence IS required, ostensibly the fee charged is to fund the BBC. There seems to be considerable opposition to that and some doubt that it produces any more revenue than it costs to administer? In some circles is considered to be 'just another bit of bureaucracy to be tolerated'! Even the UK POSSESSION of a VCR connected to a monitor which is 'capable' of receiving TV signals is supposed to have a licence! Seems like in the 'Sceptered Isle' of today the law does not require 'Proof of having illegally received TV signals' only of possessing equipment capable of doing so? Come to think of it some laptops can receive TV it's just another form of data? Hmmm! Wonder if they can do that by wireless?

No such requirement for receiving licences in Canada today where such things IMO would be unworkable. Just as well cos. between the cable service and our current experimental viewing one of the Canadian cable satellites services we have several hundred TV channels, which includes all the US and Canadian networks, a couple of BBC channels and many more speciality ones, some of which are 'Pay per Vu'. Also included are some 30 music feeds. Am thinking of transmitting TV sound and/or any of those music feeds around the property as a low power analog signal to be received by our 'Ordinary AM' radios as sometimes discussed on this ng.

Also US satellite services (from the land of the not so free but brave) can be subscribed to and received in many parts of Canada, but we are not supposed to! ;-) But one sees RVs (Recreational Vehicles) i.e. motor homes, from both sides of our border with steerable satellite antenna arrays that take only a few minutes (or even automatically) set up, free to travel from Alaska and northern Canada to Mexico or further, so it's kind of ridiculous! As usual technology outstrips attempts to regulate its use!

I do hope AM radio on the Broadcast or Medium wave Band remains although it's under attack by everything from light dimmers to attempts to force into service digital satellite radio.

Oh just to mention while I'm typing this watching BBC news in a window on my monitor, here in Canada. UK readers; do I need a licence?

Cheers chaps! (Oops! I mean fellers and gals).

PS. BTW the bench in my radio workshop in the basement of our 'igloo' is two exterior grade doors, mounted end to end, on a stand made from metal shelving uprights, a total length of about 13 feet; and it's still cluttered! But I thought I'd mention that almost any old door makes an excellent 'bench'.

[maarten]

Until a few years back, there was a similar system in the Netherlands as well. You had to pay a basic fee if you only owned a radio, and a higher fee for a television set. TV-cards in computers were also considered TV-receivers. Nowadays, everyone is assumed to have a TV-set, so the fees now come out of the tax funds.

[Mary Fisher]

This morning the chap came round to check that we had no tv, because we haven't had a licence for years. He didn't even come in, looked at the two of us and the stuff in the drive and said that, with no disrespect intended, he knew we were telling the truth. He's been doing the job a long time and knows what to look for.

The radio licence went many years ago but since we have wall to wall radio,

24 hours a day, I'd happily pay it if it were re-introduced.

Mary

[wanderer]

Big family?

:-)

[Mary Fisher]

Yes, the youngest is 36 though :-)

Mary

[Owain]

"Terry" wrote | Today, in the UK a radio receieving licence is no longer required but | a TV receiving licence IS required, ostensibly the fee charged is to | fund the BBC. There seems to be considerable opposition to that and | some doubt that it produces any more revenue than it costs to administer?

Although there are always arguments about the BBC funding, funding it as a public service broadcaster (rather than through advertising - the BBC carries advertising only for its own products eg books and magazines) has three advantages:

1. It is not subject to commercial pressures and can produce minority, special-interest or 'risky' programming. (Whether it does so is another matter).

1. It provides a quality benchmark for television programming, which commercial channels must compete with to attract viewers and thus advertising income. If there were no such quality benchmark, commercial television could sink to the lowest common denominator.

2. If the BBC were funded by advertising, the advertising revenue would be spread more thinly over a greater number of channels, and each channel would receive less.

"What your TV licence provides

Your licence allows a wide range of public services to be available for everyone, free of adverts and independent of commercial or political interests:

8 national TV channels and interactive TV 10 national radio networks Over 50 local services (listed at ) Internet services from bbc.co.uk High-quality local and national news, debate and documentaries British drama, entertainment, children's programmes and educational services Live music, orchestras, minority language programmes and social action campaigns Training and support for British production skills in music, drama, film, radio and television

BBC World Service is not funded by the licence fee. Profits from the BBC's separate commercial services keep the licence fee down.

The colour TV licence costs around £10 per month - about 33p daily per household, or 12p for everyone in the UK. It is free if you are over 75, half-price if you are registered blind. The annual cost is set by the Government and is currently £121. A black and white TV licence is £40.50. There is no radio licence."

" The first licence fee - for radio - was issued in November 1922. The amount was 10 shillings (50p). The first combined Radio/TV licence - for £2 - was issued in June 1946. Radio only licences were abolished in February 1971. The first supplementary licence fee for colour TV was introduced in January 1968. In March 2003, there were 24.1 million licences in force - 20.1 million colour; 0.1 million black and white; 3.7 million over 75s; and 0.2 million concessionary."

| Even the UK POSSESSION of a VCR connected to a monitor which is 'capable' | of receiving TV signals is supposed to have a licence! | Seems like in the 'Sceptered Isle' of today the law does not require | 'Proof of having illegally received TV signals' only of possessing | equipment capable of doing so?

That is what the licence is for, having equipment which is capable of receiving TV signals. You still have to have a licence even if you can't actually get a signal in your area.

| Come to think of it some laptops can receive TV it's just another form | of data? Hmmm! Wonder if they can do that by wireless? | Oh just to mention while I'm typing this watching BBC news in a window | on my monitor, here in Canada. UK readers; do I need a licence?

Streaming data is not considered Broadcast Television, so a licence is not required, and you are outside the jurisdiction of the British courts anyway. Computers with broadcast TV cards are required to be licenced.

You could always subscribe to BBC Canada on cable :-)

Owain

[Mary Fisher]

I wondered about that. How is it funded?

Thanks for all that, Owain,

Mary

>

[tim]

The Foreign Office

tim

[Andy Hall]

IIRC, the World Service is partly funded from central government and partly from commercial sales of its content.

For example, in the U.S., National Public Radio (public service radio and pretty much the only thing worth listening to there) takes the World Service news rather than attemting to produce their own.

one example of a local station in California taking an hour of international news mid afternoon.

When most TV news in the U.S. is 35 minutes local, 20 minutes national and 5 minutes international, this is a real oasis on a long trip.....

Of course nowadays one can listen to Radio 4 over the internet so that works too.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Mary Fisher]

How can that be when it's available world-wide 24 hours a day?

You mean that they use World Service news in their own news slots?

Yes, but I was askinig about the World Service and it's not the same - although there is some overlap of course. I prefer WS news to R4, which is tending towards the red-top style.

Mary

[G Crozier]

And I would be more than happy to see it re-introduced Mary Radio SHOULD be split from the TV licence and car radios should be split from both and separate licenses should be paid for what ever receiving apparatus you happen to own and use . Also we should not have to be paying for all the other services which hardly any of us listen to such has the BBC world service and all the foreign language broadcasts which the BBC run and maintain at the UK licence payers expense . Grant .

[Mary Fisher]

You have a point. I'd be happy. I pay for the books I read and subscribe to specialist magazines but I choose not to buy newspapers and would object if there was a blanket charge for those, included in other printed goods.

I suspect, though, that the cost of administering different licence fees would be prohibitive.

Mary

[wanderer]

The licence fee doesn't fund the BBC's world service. But then, idiots who make bald, incorrect statements to bolster their own pet theories never let the truth stand in the way, do they?

[John Wilkie]

I meant licences were required from 1939-46 in Canada. My typing--not so good.

[tim]

Especially for car radios.

Apparently, here in germany, your car radio is coverd by your house license - if you have one, but if you don't you need a separate license. This must be impossible to police, why do they bother?

tim

[Andy Hall]

Well it is and it isn't.

In the U.S. when I first started going there, you could get it on short wave - I used to take a portable receiver - but I believe they stopped coverage this way a year or two ago.

The World Service also delivers different programs to different places in umpteen different languages at different times.

Content is often a licensed thing. It can be free on the internet while still being paid for when delivered by radio.

Every day at 1500 local they carry an hour of it. Generally a co-produced program called "The World"

>>> Of course nowadays one can listen to Radio 4 over the internet so that >> works too. >

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Steve Firth]

Is that like Radio Caroline only for Catholics?

[Lou]

1. to be a pain in the ass.
2. to show their authority. without the requirement, things would really get out of hand for them. With "no" requirement, it is - I would have to think - harder to set rules and punishments for.

Lou

[G Crozier]

Prove it .

But then idiots who just pay out money without questing the reason for having to do so just encourage those in charge of our country to ask for more and more for no good reason . Do you never stop to ask yourself why we are indeed having to pay a licence fee at all for the all the rubbish that is handed out to us by the BBC which is where all the licence fee goes. Today for instance the stupid London Marathon all morning and sport in the afternoon plus a repeat performance on BBC2 this evening and I suppose both will be plastered all over the BBC news channels also all evening thank God for computers and the internet . Grant .

[geoff]

In message , tim writes

Because they're Beamters

Personally I think there should be a progressive tax on the size of car amplifiers and speakers