|
Sprinkler Systems
Uhaul move
Lawn care
Roses and trees
Ford Parts
Chrysler Parts
Lake Powell
New IPod Touch Apps
New IPhone Apps
IPhone Apps
IPad Information
IPad Apps
Android APPS
Android Games APPS
Android Systems
Android Tablets APPS and Beyond
Smartphone Apps
Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools
Tablet PC
Car Sharing Car Leasing
Tabler Pc
Fly Fishing
Toyota Cars
Vacation Rentals
Stock market
NYSE
SSE Stock
Freight & Shipping News
Gluten
Lactose
Gout
My Coupon Life
Campgrounds Check
Outdoor
Kitchen Design and Redoo
Bath Remodeling
Palm Springs
Las Vegas Vacation Tipps
Lake Powell Boating
Homes for lease
Electric and green Car Blog
Pearls and diamonds
Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App
Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
|
Fantasy » alt.fan.pratchett » Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws
| Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209632] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 16:03 |
|
TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them that
no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and thus
didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a year.
Anyway, then they started sending letters with nice red stripes down the
side and including phrases like "Enforcement Officers", "court" and
"kneecap" (possibly). Now we've got one saying that unless we pay up
pronto they'll be standing on our doorstep to take a statement under
caution.
We've argued that being forced to constantly justify why we don't want a
licence is like walking down the High Street and having to go into each
shop and explain why we have no need of their products at the moment, ta
muchly. We've also told them to stop harassing us and that we'll invoice
them for the time taken to respond to their inane wibblings. (Which we
didn't, because Dad always forgets and I'm never home)
Anyway, I've now started looking into what options we've got when they
turn up. I'm rather liking the sound of the 1997 Protection From
Harassment Act, which protects people from a course of at least two
instances of harassment; as an agent of the TV Licensing people, I
reckon they'd be party to that, right? Anyway, that's an arrestable
offence, and so if they turn up on the doorstep we could arguably
perform a citizen's arrest, right? I know that the Act requires a
reasonable apprehension of violence, but Wilkinson v Downton establishes
psychological harm or distress as valid in cases of battery, so that's a
start.
If we lived in England we'd go for trespass, but what are the options in
Scotland?
What about section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986? Could that be used?
(Threatening words or behaviour)
The Criminal Law Act 1977 also seems handy, dealing with "violence for
securing entry" and "adverse occupation of residential premises"
So, what's the TV Licensing Authority's statutory basis for
entry-and-search powers? Is there anything we can do to tell the buggers
to sod off?
In fact, in the last couple of years we've thought of getting Sky or
something, but we don't want to need a licence until they stop nagging
us about it....
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209636 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 16:26 |
|
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:21 +0000, Torak
<a.w.m.perry [at] durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>
>Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
>from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them that
>no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
>pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and thus
>didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a year.
Er, unless things are different up there (which I doubt in this case), if
you have a device capable of receiving broadcast TV (i.e it's got a tuner
in it) you need a licence. This includes video recorders and PC cards,
just not having it connected to an aerial isn't sufficient excuse.
(Unless that's changed in the recent past, which I'm fairly sure it hasn't)
--
Andy Brown
I am not a vegetarian because I love animals; I am a vegetarian
because I hate plants. -- A. Whitney Brown
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209644 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 17:33 |
|
jester wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:21 +0000, Torak
>
>>TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>>
>>Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
>
>>from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them that
>
>>no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
>>pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and thus
>>didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a year.
>
> Er, unless things are different up there (which I doubt in this case), if
> you have a device capable of receiving broadcast TV (i.e it's got a tuner
> in it) you need a licence. This includes video recorders and PC cards,
> just not having it connected to an aerial isn't sufficient excuse.
That's a common misconception, and certainly one that they don't go out
of their way to correct. But no, that's one of the aspects that we're
pretty sure on. (And anyway, we don't even *have* an aerial!)
What the TV Licensing people themselves say is this:
"What if I only use a TV to watch videos/DVDs/as a monitor for my games
console? Do I still need a licence?
"You need to notify us in writing that this is the case and one our
Enforcement Officers may need to visit you to confirm that you do not
need a licence."
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209646 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 17:38 |
|
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:21 +0000, Torak
> <a.w.m.perry [at] durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>>
>> Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
>> from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them
>> that no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
>> pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and
>> thus didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a
>> year.
>>
> Er, unless things are different up there (which I doubt in this case),
> if you have a device capable of receiving broadcast TV (i.e it's got a
> tuner in it) you need a licence. This includes video recorders and PC
> cards, just not having it connected to an aerial isn't sufficient
> excuse.
>
> (Unless that's changed in the recent past, which I'm fairly sure it
> hasn't)
>
.... and even if you don't have a TV, you would need a radio license instead.
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209648 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 17:59 |
|
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Torak wrote:
> jester wrote:
> > Er, unless things are different up there (which I doubt in this case), if
> > you have a device capable of receiving broadcast TV (i.e it's got a tuner
> > in it) you need a licence. This includes video recorders and PC cards,
> > just not having it connected to an aerial isn't sufficient excuse.
>
> That's a common misconception, and certainly one that they don't go out of
> their way to correct. But no, that's one of the aspects that we're pretty sure
> on. (And anyway, we don't even *have* an aerial!)
>
> What the TV Licensing people themselves say is this:
>
> "What if I only use a TV to watch videos/DVDs/as a monitor for my games
> console? Do I still need a licence?
> "You need to notify us in writing that this is the case and one our
> Enforcement Officers may need to visit you to confirm that you do not need a
> licence."
>
At which point they'll almost certainly say no, because the TV's still
capable of use as a TV. The law itself is not the same as what the TV
licensing lot say.
--
flippa [at] flippac.org
There is no magic bullet. There are, however, plenty of bullets that
magically home in on feet when not used in exactly the right circumstances.
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209649 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 17:59 |
|
David Harcombe <David.Harcombe [at] bigfoot.com> wrote:
> ... and even if you don't have a TV, you would need a radio license
> instead.
Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for some
purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a closed-circuit
monitor, video player or a games console, you're also exempt provided
you can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
(applies for UK only)
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209672 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 20:01 |
|
in article dqlqkv$69o$1 [at] heffalump.dur.ac.uk, Torak at
a.w.m.perry [at] durham.ac.uk wrote on 18/01/2006 8:33 AM:
> jester wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:21 +0000, Torak
>>
>>> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>>>
>>> Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
>>
>>> from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them that
>>
>>> no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
>>> pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and thus
>>> didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a year.
>>
>> Er, unless things are different up there (which I doubt in this case), if
>> you have a device capable of receiving broadcast TV (i.e it's got a tuner
>> in it) you need a licence. This includes video recorders and PC cards,
>> just not having it connected to an aerial isn't sufficient excuse.
>
> That's a common misconception, and certainly one that they don't go out
> of their way to correct. But no, that's one of the aspects that we're
> pretty sure on. (And anyway, we don't even *have* an aerial!)
>
> What the TV Licensing people themselves say is this:
>
> "What if I only use a TV to watch videos/DVDs/as a monitor for my games
> console? Do I still need a licence?
> "You need to notify us in writing that this is the case and one our
> Enforcement Officers may need to visit you to confirm that you do not
> need a licence."
>
That seems clear enough. So if one of their Enforcement Officers does visit
you, you can't really complain, unless they continue to harass you
afterwards.
--
Lesley Weston.
Brightly_coloured_blob is real, but I don't often check even the few bits
that get through Yahoo's filters. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca,
changing spelling and spacing as required.
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209705 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 21:18 |
|
Torak said:
> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
Yeah. TV evil too.
> Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
> from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them that
> no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
> pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and thus
> didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a year.
Yes. That exactly mirrors my situation.
> Anyway, then they started sending letters with nice red stripes down the
> side and including phrases like "Enforcement Officers", "court" and
> "kneecap" (possibly). Now we've got one saying that unless we pay up
> pronto they'll be standing on our doorstep to take a statement under
> caution.
Yeah, we got one of those too. I phoned up and said "look, I'm getting sick
of these letters. Send your chap round by all means, but I'm under no legal
obligation to open the door to him, so I won't. I hope it rains that day. I
don't want your grotty service and I don't want your grotty letters either.
All future letters you send to me will be chucked in the bin, unread. Bye."
And that's what we've done. They never did send anyone round, as far as we
know. (At a guess, they probably sent one of those spinning roofracks to
have a sniff around, so some poor sap may have been stuck down the road
sipping tepid coffee whilst waiting for us to fire up the box for some
illicit soap-opera-watching. If so, I hope he was getting a good overtime
rate - and that he had a cracking good Discworld book to keep him from
getting too bored.)
> Anyway, I've now started looking into what options we've got when they
> turn up. I'm rather liking the sound of the 1997 Protection From
> Harassment Act, which protects people from a course of at least two
> instances of harassment; as an agent of the TV Licensing people, I
> reckon they'd be party to that, right?
Quite possibly not; I am no lawyer, but you may well find that their
activities are exempted.
> Anyway, that's an arrestable
> offence, and so if they turn up on the doorstep we could arguably
> perform a citizen's arrest, right?
I wouldn't push that line too far!
Just don't open the door to them if you can possibly avoid it. If you cannot
avoid it, be sure to get names, and be sure to cause as big a stink as
possible in the press afterwards.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209734 ] |
Mi, 18 Januar 2006 23:21 |
|
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:21 +0000, Torak wrote:
> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>
<Snip>
If you feel you are being harrassed, get in touch with your MP/MSP and
tell him or her. Ask them to contact the TV Licensing Authority on your
behalf. That's what I did, though I don't have a TV or anything which can
receive TV broadcasts so I am on firmer ground.
Having said that, they need to have full authorisation to go inside
residential premises and as far as I am aware it has to be the
authorisation of the resident.
If someone turns up to check, they will not actually be employees of the
TV Licensing Authority but of Crapita, which explains why they use
bullying tactics. They may have a TV detector van or hand held detection
equipment and you can't stop them using that because it is not
surveillance. But, use of a TV detector equipment is only defined as
being neither directed nor intrusive surveillance if it is carried out
from *outside* the premises. S26(6) Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
2000 (RIPA) confirms that.
Of course, if they enter the premises uninvited then it becomes intrusive
surveillance and anyone authorised for that needs a bloody good reason to
do it. Heads can roll if they get it wrong which is why it is very
sparingly used.
And if you invite them in then it isn't covert so you wouldn't get any
protection from RIPA in those circumstances.
S46 RIPA lists public bodies allowed to carry out authorised surveillance,
directed or intrusive, in Scotland and the TV Licensing Authority is not
on that list. Neither is Crapita.
So, as far as I can see all they can do is stand outside your house
until the cows come home, pointing their detector apparatus at it in an
attempt to catch you picking up TV signals. If they claim to have some
other right of entry, ask them for chapter and verse on where it is in the
legislation. But you are probably better off getting your MP/MSP to do
this for you. The other avenue you might want to choose is to go to your
local Citizens' Advice Bureau if you still have one.
--
Cyclops
Evil Heretic Infiltrator
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209754 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 00:29 |
|
Phil Davison wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:03:21 +0000, Torak wrote:
>
>>TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>
> <Snip>
>
> If you feel you are being harrassed, get in touch with your MP/MSP and
> tell him or her. Ask them to contact the TV Licensing Authority on your
> behalf. That's what I did, though I don't have a TV or anything which can
> receive TV broadcasts so I am on firmer ground.
>
> Having said that, they need to have full authorisation to go inside
> residential premises and as far as I am aware it has to be the
> authorisation of the resident.
>
> If someone turns up to check, they will not actually be employees of the
> TV Licensing Authority but of Crapita, which explains why they use
> bullying tactics. They may have a TV detector van or hand held detection
> equipment and you can't stop them using that because it is not
> surveillance. But, use of a TV detector equipment is only defined as
> being neither directed nor intrusive surveillance if it is carried out
> from *outside* the premises. S26(6) Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
> 2000 (RIPA) confirms that.
>
> Of course, if they enter the premises uninvited then it becomes intrusive
> surveillance and anyone authorised for that needs a bloody good reason to
> do it. Heads can roll if they get it wrong which is why it is very
> sparingly used.
>
> And if you invite them in then it isn't covert so you wouldn't get any
> protection from RIPA in those circumstances.
>
> S46 RIPA lists public bodies allowed to carry out authorised surveillance,
> directed or intrusive, in Scotland and the TV Licensing Authority is not
> on that list. Neither is Crapita.
>
> So, as far as I can see all they can do is stand outside your house
> until the cows come home, pointing their detector apparatus at it in an
> attempt to catch you picking up TV signals. If they claim to have some
> other right of entry, ask them for chapter and verse on where it is in the
> legislation. But you are probably better off getting your MP/MSP to do
> this for you. The other avenue you might want to choose is to go to your
> local Citizens' Advice Bureau if you still have one.
Great stuff, cheers. Is any of the stuff they might potentially (if
they've taken leave of their senses, which has been known to happen) do
an arrestable offence?
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209774 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 03:07 |
|
"Torak" <a.w.m.perry [at] durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:dqllca$2qo$1 [at] heffalump.dur.ac.uk...
> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>
> Anyway, for the last decade or so we've been getting constant letters
> from those dear people. We always used to write back and tell them that
> no, we didn't receive any signal, only use our TV for watching
> pre-recorded videos (which we can legally do without a licence) and thus
> didn't need a licence. That usually gets rid of them for up to a year.
Please forgive an ignorant American, but what on earth is a television
licence?
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209780 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 04:42 |
|
Shmoe wrote:
> Please forgive an ignorant American, but what on earth is a television
> licence?
Well, as you know, in Merkia we give money to insurance companies who
give it to drug companies who use it to advertise Viagra on telly. The
TV companies pay most of it to executives and use the rest to make/buy
programs.
The UK has a much simpler system. If you watch TV you are supposed to
give money directly to the BBC, who lose most of it down the back of
the chair and spend the rest on making/buying programs. In exchange,
they don't have ads[1]
-thomas
[1] much the same way that PBS doesn't have ads -- ie they confine them
mostly to a few blocks that are long enough that you can go make a cup
of tea.
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209782 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 05:02 |
|
> Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for some
> purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a closed-circuit
> monitor, video player or a games console, you're also exempt provided
> you can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
You have to... prove... that you're *not* doing something?
Man, and I thought the US was the king of dippy legal regulations. The
more I read this group, the more I'm humbled by the universality of
bureaucratic and corporate stupidity.
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209789 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 07:11 |
|
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 04:02:24 +0000, Boyd Bottorff wrote:
>> Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for some
>> purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a closed-circuit
>> monitor, video player or a games console, you're also exempt provided
>> you can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
>
> You have to... prove... that you're *not* doing something?
>
No. That's why there are such things as TV detector vans. If you had to
prove it, there would be a statutory right of entry to your home and
nobody would ever have invented TV detection equipment.
This is also why, in a country where any public body which uses
surveillance has to authorise its use, using TV detection equipment from
outside residential premises to check on what is going on inside those
premises is specifically excluded from the definition of surveillance.
--
Cyclops
Evil Heretic Infiltrator
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209791 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 07:34 |
|
Torak wrote:
> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
Move to Australia. We get up to 5 channels for free. ABC and SBS have good
documentaries, humourous British Comedies and Foriegn language Films which
is just about all I watch. (Speaking of which they showed us this French
movie called The Visitors where this Knight comes to the present day.It had
subtitles of course and was one of the funniest movies I've ever seen,
Hollywood made a really sucky remake apparently which is typical).
We only have to pay if we choose to get 'pay TV' which as far as I can tell
is mainly sport. I hate watching sport.
It totally sux that you have to pay for programs which even if you did watch
them you didn't actually ask for. I thought that was what TV advertising was
for.
N
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209800 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 08:21 |
|
(TV Licence enforcement)
Torak said:
> Great stuff, cheers. Is any of the stuff they might potentially (if
> they've taken leave of their senses, which has been known to happen) do
> an arrestable offence?
Yes. If they've taken leave of their senses, they might blow your front door
off with Semtex, storm the house, taking hostages as they go, and then
conduct a destructive search for television sets (you know, smashing down
doors, ripping the plaster out of suspiciously-thick walls, flattening
furniture with sledgehammers - the usual stuff), and planting incriminating
evidence (e.g. copies of the Radio Times), before ripping your throat out
with the sharp end of a portable aerial, in sheer frustration at your
innocence.
All of these offences are arrestable.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209811 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 11:19 |
|
naomi wrote:
> Torak wrote:
> > TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>
> Move to Australia. We get up to 5 channels for free. ABC and SBS have good
> documentaries, humourous British Comedies and Foriegn language Films which
> is just about all I watch. (Speaking of which they showed us this French
> movie called The Visitors where this Knight comes to the present day.It had
> subtitles of course and was one of the funniest movies I've ever seen,
> Hollywood made a really sucky remake apparently which is typical).
>
> We only have to pay if we choose to get 'pay TV' which as far as I can tell
> is mainly sport. I hate watching sport.
>
> It totally sux that you have to pay for programs which even if you did watch
> them you didn't actually ask for. I thought that was what TV advertising was
> for.
>
> N
Move to New Zealand instead -we're much nicer! Crap tv though, unless
you lash out several hundreds of dollars and get a Sky personal video
recorder. Dad loves his, it cuts out the dross and is lots easier to
use than a VCR. He seems to be mostly watching reruns of British
comedy though, Fawlty Towers, Red Dwarf, Frank Spencer, etc. So I
guess that's brought this thread back to the start?
Jane
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209813 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 11:27 |
|
naomi wrote:
> Torak wrote:
>> TV Licensing EVIL. But we all knew that.
>
> Move to Australia. We get up to 5 channels for free. ABC and SBS have
> good documentaries, humourous British Comedies and Foriegn language
> Films which is just about all I watch. (Speaking of which they showed
> us this French movie called The Visitors where this Knight comes to
> the present day.It had subtitles of course and was one of the
> funniest movies I've ever seen, Hollywood made a really sucky remake
> apparently which is typical).
Ah, Les Visiteurs, with Jean Reno. Yes, it is a brilliant film. The
Hollywood version is dire, but the French sequel isn't too bad.
> It totally sux that you have to pay for programs which even if you
> did watch them you didn't actually ask for. I thought that was what
> TV advertising was for.
The point of the licence is that there isn't any advertising. Between
programs, you get ads for upcoming shows and features, but programs are not
interrupted.
Because it isn't founded by advertising money, it can also produce and
broadcast narrower features, and doesn't need to dumb down documentaries and
political commentaries. In theory, at least. In practice, it tends to be
mostly mainstream entertainment and dumbed-down stuff.
Orjan
--
The Tale of Westala and Villtin
http://tale.cunobaros.com/
Fiction, Thoughts and Software
http://www.cunobaros.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209814 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 11:33 |
|
Torak wrote:
....
After reading the thread, I'd have to say you could have it much worse:
here in Italy, license payment is mandatory if you have a television
set, period. No "But I don't use it to watch TV". No "but I only play
with my xbox". And the quality of the RAI and other channels is dismal,
compared to the Beeb and channel 4. At least for my taste.
I even got a letter when I'd just moved here. I didn't even have a TV.
Then another letter, this one a bit more harassing: (paraphrased of
course) "You still haven't paid. Do you know this is an offence that
can land you in court". Sheesh.
Saludos
Adriano
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209821 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 12:10 |
|
<thomas [at] drizzle.net> wrote in message
news:1137642155.363444.217550 [at] g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> [1] much the same way that PBS doesn't have ads -- ie they confine them
> mostly to a few blocks that are long enough that you can go make a cup
> of tea.
Er, no. The BBC *doesn't* have ads, at all [on its terrestrial channels at
least; it part-owns the UKTV channels on satellite/cable with Catlton, and
they show ads there; and I've not watched BBC3/4 long enough to see if there
are ads there].
They do trail their own programmes, and extremely infrequently I've seen
them plug their TV listings magazine "Radio Times". But otherwise no ads.
Paul
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209826 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 12:59 |
|
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 16:59, René wrote:
> Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for some
> purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a closed-circuit
> monitor, video player or a games console, you're also exempt provided
> you can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
You have to prove it is not *capable* of receiving broadcasts. If you have a
TV set for use as a closed circuit monitor but the broadcast receiving
circuitry is still in place and operable then you need a licence. The same
applies if you have a video recorder *capable* of receiving broadcasts even
if you are just using it to record CCTV pictures which you can watch on a
monitor that is not capable of receiving a broadcast. Also, if you had a
monochrome TV and a video recorder you would need a colour TV licence
because the video recorder is able to receive colour broadcasts even though
you can only see them in black & white on your TV set.
--
Andy Davison
andy [at] oiyou.force9.co.uk
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209834 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 13:20 |
|
Richard Heathfield wrote:
> (TV Licence enforcement)
> Torak said:
>
>>Great stuff, cheers. Is any of the stuff they might potentially (if
>>they've taken leave of their senses, which has been known to happen) do
>>an arrestable offence?
>
> Yes. If they've taken leave of their senses, they might blow your front door
> off with Semtex, storm the house, taking hostages as they go, and then
> conduct a destructive search for television sets (you know, smashing down
> doors, ripping the plaster out of suspiciously-thick walls, flattening
> furniture with sledgehammers - the usual stuff), and planting incriminating
> evidence (e.g. copies of the Radio Times), before ripping your throat out
> with the sharp end of a portable aerial, in sheer frustration at your
> innocence.
>
> All of these offences are arrestable.
If we weren't talking about the TV Licensing Authority, I'd think you
were joking...
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209835 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 13:22 |
|
Orjan Westin wrote:
> naomi wrote:
French movie called The Visitors where this Knight comes to
>> the present day.It had subtitles of course and was one of the
>> funniest movies I've ever seen, Hollywood made a really sucky remake
>> apparently which is typical).
>
> Ah, Les Visiteurs, with Jean Reno. Yes, it is a brilliant film. The
> Hollywood version is dire, but the French sequel isn't too bad.
>
> Orjan
Do you know if they are available on DVD?
n
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209844 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 13:41 |
|
naomi wrote:
> Orjan Westin wrote:
>> naomi wrote:
> French movie called The Visitors where this Knight comes to
>>> the present day.It had subtitles of course and was one of the
>>> funniest movies I've ever seen, Hollywood made a really sucky remake
>>> apparently which is typical).
>>
>> Ah, Les Visiteurs, with Jean Reno. Yes, it is a brilliant film. The
>> Hollywood version is dire, but the French sequel isn't too bad.
>
> Do you know if they are available on DVD?
Yes, but I have no idea whether they've been released down under.
For what it's worth, they're both available from Amazon.com
Orjan
--
The Tale of Westala and Villtin
http://tale.cunobaros.com/
Fiction, Thoughts and Software
http://www.cunobaros.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209846 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 13:48 |
|
Paul Harman wrote:
> <thomas [at] drizzle.net> wrote in message
> news:1137642155.363444.217550 [at] g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>[1] much the same way that PBS doesn't have ads -- ie they confine them
>>mostly to a few blocks that are long enough that you can go make a cup
>>of tea.
>
>
>
> Er, no. The BBC *doesn't* have ads, at all [on its terrestrial channels at
> least; it part-owns the UKTV channels on satellite/cable with Catlton, and
> they show ads there; and I've not watched BBC3/4 long enough to see if there
> are ads there].
>
> They do trail their own programmes, and extremely infrequently I've seen
> them plug their TV listings magazine "Radio Times". But otherwise no ads.
>
> Paul
>
>
And even those trailers are shown in the natural gaps between programs
rather than right in the middle. It's always a bit funny when we get
Merkian programs (such as the simpsons) over here, and you can see the
blackouts where they'd normally stick an ad break in. Scarily frequent
they are too.
They have been known to interrupt films for the ten o'clock news though,
and nothing annoys me more.
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209859 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 14:46 |
|
on 19/01/2006 12:48 Bosola said the following:
<snip>
> They have been known to interrupt films for the ten o'clock news though,
> and nothing annoys me more.
That would be the independant TV channel rather tnan the BBC and I seem
to recall something about the channel having to show a news programme at
10 o'clock as part of the their broadcast licence.
esmi
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209862 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 14:56 |
|
"esmi" <esmi [at] lspace.org> wrote in message
news:dqo5mc$b8f$2 [at] groundhog.korenwolf.net...
> That would be the independant TV channel rather tnan the BBC and I seem to
> recall something about the channel having to show a news programme at 10
> o'clock as part of the their broadcast licence.
Not quite. ITV abandoned the "News at 10" slot, and the BBC switched to
using it. Since then, yes the BBC have split a film across the news.
Paul
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209867 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 15:33 |
|
Shmoe <packersrock [at] earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Please forgive an ignorant American, but what on earth is a television
> licence?
In concept, it's similar to the FCC charges and Franchise Fee (and taxes
on those) on your cable bills, except that you pay a larger sum once or
twice a year, and actually get a little bit back for it, like BBC
programmes.
Regards,
--
*Art
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209878 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 16:33 |
|
on 19/01/2006 13:56 Paul Harman said the following:
> "esmi" <esmi [at] lspace.org> wrote...
>>That would be the independant TV channel rather tnan the BBC and I seem to
>>recall something about the channel having to show a news programme at 10
>>o'clock as part of the their broadcast licence.
> Not quite. ITV abandoned the "News at 10" slot, and the BBC switched to
> using it. Since then, yes the BBC have split a film across the news.
My mistake. Shows how often I watch BBC at that time!
esmi
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209908 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 17:53 |
|
"Adriano Varoli Piazza" <moranar [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>After reading the thread, I'd have to say you could have it much worse:
>here in Italy, license payment is mandatory if you have a television
>set, period. No "But I don't use it to watch TV". No "but I only play
>with my xbox". And the quality of the RAI and other channels is dismal,
>compared to the Beeb and channel 4. At least for my taste.
RAI is, is...no, I'm not even going to start. But anyone complaining too
loudly about the BBC should be locked in a room and made to watch RAI
until they repent.
--
Kimberley Verburg
kim [at] lspace.org
|
|
|
| Re: Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209947 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 20:17 |
|
Andy Davison wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 16:59, Ren� wrote:
>
>
>>Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for some
>>purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a closed-circuit
>>monitor, video player or a games console, you're also exempt provided
>>you can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
>
>
> You have to prove it is not *capable* of receiving broadcasts. If you have a
> TV set for use as a closed circuit monitor but the broadcast receiving
> circuitry is still in place and operable then you need a licence. The same
> applies if you have a video recorder *capable* of receiving broadcasts even
> if you are just using it to record CCTV pictures which you can watch on a
> monitor that is not capable of receiving a broadcast. Also, if you had a
> monochrome TV and a video recorder you would need a colour TV licence
> because the video recorder is able to receive colour broadcasts even though
> you can only see them in black & white on your TV set.
OK IANAL but googling on "No TV license" leads to quite a few sites
which say that de-tuning TV and Video and not having an aerial should be
sufficient.
This could be tricky in these days of auto-tuning TVs and videos that
tune in when you first turn them on.
Again IANAL, shirley it is up to them to prove that the equipment is
capable of receiving programmes as it is - without tuning or an aerial.
The presumtion of innocence is only withheld for motoring offences :-)
--
Large Dave
This sig deliberately left blank.
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209964 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 21:31 |
|
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:29:23 +0000, Torak wrote:
> Phil Davison wrote:
<Snip my comments>
>
> Great stuff, cheers. Is any of the stuff they might potentially (if
> they've taken leave of their senses, which has been known to happen) do an
> arrestable offence?
Why are you so keen to arrest someone? If they break and enter, which I
suppose they would have to do to gain access uninvited, then that is
criminal but you'd have to be able to prove exactly who did it. If you get
problems from a public body you go down the civil route and throw the
European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act at them.
Obviously, you would need to know which Article of the ECHR and which
section of the HRA so you take legal advice at that point (if not before).
And, much as afpers like helping each other out, this really isn't the
place to do that!
--
Cyclops
Evil Heretic Infiltrator
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209965 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 21:32 |
|
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:20:03 +0000, Torak wrote:
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> (TV Licence enforcement)
>> Torak said:
>>
>>>Great stuff, cheers. Is any of the stuff they might potentially (if
>>>they've taken leave of their senses, which has been known to happen) do
>>>an arrestable offence?
>>
>> Yes. If they've taken leave of their senses, they might blow your front
>> door off with Semtex, storm the house, taking hostages as they go, and
>> then conduct a destructive search for television sets (you know,
>> smashing down doors, ripping the plaster out of suspiciously-thick
>> walls, flattening furniture with sledgehammers - the usual stuff), and
>> planting incriminating evidence (e.g. copies of the Radio Times), before
>> ripping your throat out with the sharp end of a portable aerial, in
>> sheer frustration at your innocence.
>>
>> All of these offences are arrestable.
>
> If we weren't talking about the TV Licensing Authority, I'd think you were
> joking...
But you're not. You're talking about Crapita. Be afraid! Be very afraid!
--
Cyclops
Evil Heretic Infiltrator
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209967 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 21:40 |
|
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:59:33 +0000, Andy Davison wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 16:59, René wrote:
>
>> Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for some
>> purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a closed-circuit
>> monitor, video player or a games console, you're also exempt provided
>> you can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
>
> You have to prove it is not *capable* of receiving broadcasts. If you have
> a TV set for use as a closed circuit monitor but the broadcast receiving
> circuitry is still in place and operable then you need a licence. The same
> applies if you have a video recorder *capable* of receiving broadcasts
> even if you are just using it to record CCTV pictures which you can watch
> on a monitor that is not capable of receiving a broadcast.
Strangely enough, that is not what the TV Licensing web site says. It says
you mustn't *use* the equipment to watch TV or record programmes. On the
page at...
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/information/index.jsp
....it says,
"Do I need a licence?
If you use a TV or any other device to receive or record TV programmes
(for example, a VCR, set-top box, DVD recorder or PC with a broadcast
card) - you need a TV Licence. You are required by law to have one. "
I must admit I think that is all very lax. Obviously it is for guidance
only and should not be taken as an authoritative statement of the law but
if your interpretation is correct then it is at the very least misleading.
--
Cyclops
Evil Heretic Infiltrator
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209970 ] |
Do, 19 Januar 2006 21:59 |
|
Phil Davison <phil [at] cyclops.force9.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:59:33 +0000, Andy Davison wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 16:59, René wrote:
>>
>>> Not in the UK. And if you have a television installed and used for
>>> some purpose other than receiving TV program, such as a
>>> closed-circuit monitor, video player or a games console, you're
>>> also exempt provided you can demonstrate it is not used for
>>> receiving broadcasts.
>>
>> You have to prove it is not *capable* of receiving broadcasts. If
>> you have a TV set for use as a closed circuit monitor but the
>> broadcast receiving circuitry is still in place and operable then
>> you need a licence. The same applies if you have a video recorder
>> *capable* of receiving broadcasts even if you are just using it to
>> record CCTV pictures which you can watch on a monitor that is not
>> capable of receiving a broadcast.
>
> Strangely enough, that is not what the TV Licensing web site says. It
> says you mustn't *use* the equipment to watch TV or record
> programmes.
Well, that's what *I* said, because that's where I got it from.
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209997 ] |
Fr, 20 Januar 2006 00:19 |
|
Orjan Westin wrote:
> naomi wrote:
>> Orjan Westin wrote:
>>> naomi wrote:
>> French movie called The Visitors where this Knight comes to
>>>> the present day.It had subtitles of course and was one of the
>>>> funniest movies I've ever seen, Hollywood made a really sucky
>>>> remake apparently which is typical).
>>>
>>> Ah, Les Visiteurs, with Jean Reno. Yes, it is a brilliant film.
>>> The Hollywood version is dire, but the French sequel isn't too bad.
>>
>> Do you know if they are available on DVD?
>
> Yes, but I have no idea whether they've been released down under.
>
> For what it's worth, they're both available from Amazon.com
>
> Orjan
Thanks, I'll check it out.
n
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209998 ] |
Fr, 20 Januar 2006 00:21 |
|
Phil Davison wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:29:23 +0000, Torak wrote:
>>Phil Davison wrote:
>
> <Snip my comments>
>
>>Great stuff, cheers. Is any of the stuff they might potentially (if
>>they've taken leave of their senses, which has been known to happen) do an
>>arrestable offence?
>
> Why are you so keen to arrest someone? If they break and enter, which I
Because it's always better to know in advance what you can and can't do,
rather than do something and find you can't. If they try to barge in
after we refuse them entry, I don't want to end up finding that they've
got statutory powers of entry.
And as for arresting... well, letters they can ignore, phone calls they
can ignore, obnoxious enforcers being fobbed off they can ignore. A
prosecution they can't.
> suppose they would have to do to gain access uninvited, then that is
> criminal but you'd have to be able to prove exactly who did it. If you get
> problems from a public body you go down the civil route and throw the
> European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act at them.
> Obviously, you would need to know which Article of the ECHR and which
> section of the HRA so you take legal advice at that point (if not before).
> And, much as afpers like helping each other out, this really isn't the
> place to do that!
The ECHR and HRA are easy, anyway - spent the best part of a year
studying them. It's just a matter of researching a bit to see exactly
what can be applied.
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #209999 ] |
Fr, 20 Januar 2006 00:22 |
|
Phil Davison wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:20:03 +0000, Torak wrote:
>>Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>(TV Licence enforcement)
>>>
>>>All of these offences are arrestable.
>>
>>If we weren't talking about the TV Licensing Authority, I'd think you were
>>joking...
>
> But you're not. You're talking about Crapita. Be afraid! Be very afraid!
A collection company or something? Either way, they're operating as
agents on behalf of the TVLA, which is close enough.
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #210004 ] |
Fr, 20 Januar 2006 00:34 |
|
In article <dqp70b$96c$2 [at] heffalump.dur.ac.uk>, a.w.m.perry [at] durham.ac.uk=20
says...
> Phil Davison wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:20:03 +0000, Torak wrote:
> >>Richard Heathfield wrote:
> >>>(TV Licence enforcement)
> >>>
> >>>All of these offences are arrestable.
> >>
> >>If we weren't talking about the TV Licensing Authority, I'd think you w=
ere
> >>joking...
> >=20
> > But you're not. You're talking about Crapita. Be afraid! Be very afraid=
!
>=20
> A collection company or something? Either way, they're operating as=20
> agents on behalf of the TVLA, which is close enough.
Capita describes itself as "the UK's leading support services company"=20
and says that it "is at the forefront of the evolution of business=20
process outsourcing in the UK, focussed on service transformation=20
through innovation." Any company that can say that mwith a straight=20
face, and mean it, has got to be dangerous.
They have grown rich by contracting out all sorts of bits of work the=20
goverment used to do. In theory, this is meant to provide increased=20
efficiency and reduced costs. In practice, after paying lawyers and=20
consultants millions to draw up the contracts, it often turns out the=20
opposite. But the contracts often turn out to be of the "heads I win,=20
tails you lose" sort: if they make a profit, they keep it. If they make=20
a loss, they either walk away from the contract or the goverment has to=20
bribe them not to do so by covering the losses and even giving them a=20
profit after all. But they do have one enormous virtue: they provide=20
plausible deniability for ministers, plus the ability to announce that=20
such knowledge as they do have of cockups is covered by commercial=20
confidentiality.
Cynical? Moi? Say not so!
(But look through any of copy of Private Eye over the last ten years).=20
--=20
[at] lec =A9awley
http://www.livejournal.com/~randombler
|
|
|
| Re: [I] Oracle - TV licensing and harassment laws [message #210005 ] |
Fr, 20 Januar 2006 00:33 |
|
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:21:34 +0000, Torak wrote:
> The ECHR and HRA are easy, anyway - spent the best part of a year studying
> them. It's just a matter of researching a bit to see exactly what can be
> applied.
There's no such thing as "easy" when it comes to law because if it were
there would never be any reason for any case to go to appeal. As for ECHR
and HRA, they don't exactly tie up. For instance, there is still some
doubt over whether certain things done in the UK which are not criminal
under UK law are criminal under EC law. It can get very complicated.
As you will be well aware, it can be an extremely grey area in some cases
whether ECHR/HRA are even relevant, let alone whether there has been a
breach of one, the other or both.
--
Cyclops
Evil Heretic Infiltrator
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Fr Mai 25 00:34:19 CEST 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,51693 Sekunden |
