Freedom from TV license oppression

[colonel c]

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

[DonkeyApple]

colonel c said:

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

Are you suggesting that you need more time to unplug the aerial from the TV? I blame the BBC and their communist agenda to invade every home and put anyone who doesn't watch EastEnders in prison.

[Cotty]

AA999 said:

According to evidence on youtube it then goes:

8. Number of weeks later crapita and police turn up at doorstep with dodgy warrant based on made up evidence. Police force entry and allow crapita goons to look around. Crapita goons then state "you have the ability to receive live TV" and issue court proceedings against you.

That's about the size of it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_nRsnd2-Lo

[4v6]

mph1977 said:

have you ever seen the bilge that passes for television in purely commercial places ?
before people cite various US productions - how many of those were created by or for permium services ..

I-dont-care.

Television and the shyte thats ejaculated out of it in the name of "entertainment" interests me about as much as the contents of the toilet bowl after a heavy session on the vindaloo ( the toilet bowl has the advantage) and is just as easily erased.

As for "why not let them in?"....Easy, its not up to people to have to prove a flipping negative!
Innocence is the presumed default in british law, I see no reason why some scutter with a card working on behalf of a private company should be allowed access to "verify" or "check" anything or harass anyone who refuses to comply with their unwanted and probably unlawful demands.
Unless of course youre the kind of person who has nothing to hide, in which case Tescos can arrange a visit for thursday at 10 pm to see if youre guilty of doing something deviant with a banana you bought earlier.

[supersingle]

colonel c said:

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

Oi colonel! You missed your wallet inspection this morning. That's a fine of three dibs of your Sherbert Dib Dab. Don't be late tommorow!

[grumbledoak]

mph1977 said:

and to hell with the universal service obligation, to hell with public service broadcasting and so on ...

Yes, please. As soon as possible. Thanks muchly.

[Cotty]

colonel c said:

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

I currently have a basic Sky package and maybe switch the TV on once a week and have a flick around while I am eating my dinner. My TV is mainly used to watch DVD's from what used to be Lovefilm, now Amazon and playing the odd game on and Xbox360. My evenings are mainly spent on the PC watching stuff like Petrolicious https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgyJPixJl95X1ut3E... Drive, Dirt every Day, Roadkill etc surfing Pistonheads and a couple of other forums.

However I have the ability to watch live TV via my PC, which I don't do. That's the problem. I would quite happily junk the Sky subscription and box and not pay for a licence I do not need. But they would try to incriminate me for having the ability to receive a signal and I don't have the time, money or inclination to fight that in court.

[heppers75]

colonel c said:

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

Oh yes nothing to hide nothing to fear and all that... Always had an issue with that ethos.

[rohrl]

4v6 said:

I-dont-care.

Television and the shyte thats ejaculated out of it in the name of "entertainment" interests me about as much as the .....

As usual your scatological post couldn't be more wrong. Television is in a golden age at the moment, easily outperforming Hollywood. There have been loads of excellent drama series and documentaries produced for television in the past few years. Are David Attenbrough's programmes shyte, or The Sopranos, The Wire...?

[4v6]

rohrl said:

As usual your scatological post couldn't be more wrong. Television is in a golden age at the moment, easily outperforming Hollywood. There have been loads of excellent drama series and documentaries produced for television in the past few years. Are David Attenbrough's programmes shyte, or The Sopranos, The Wire...?

Spoken like a true slave to the boobtube.

You can sit there all year long with matchsticks propping up your eyelids, mouth agape at the spectacle, drooling down your chin if you want to and you can pay for it, thats your choice.
Mine is to not be interested in such stuff and to reasonably expect to be left alone and not to be bothered by a rotten corporation acting the bully.
"Golden age", what a lot of hyperbole.

[DonkeyApple]

Cotty said:

However I have the ability to watch live TV via my PC, which I don't do. That's the problem. I would quite happily junk the Sky subscription and box and not pay for a licence I do not need. But they would try to incriminate me for having the ability to receive a signal and I don't have the time, money or inclination to fight that in court.

And that is really what the system relies upon. We know they have to prove that we have been using our systems to watch live broadcasts and they know that they actually cannot without actually catching you in the act which is all but impossible.

This is why the heavy tactics.

It's why there is clearly a commercial opportunity for a box that once installed verifies that you are compliant with the license requirements.

[Cotty]

rohrl said:

As usual your scatological post couldn't be more wrong. Television is in a golden age at the moment, easily outperforming Hollywood. There have been loads of excellent drama series and documentaries produced for television in the past few years. Are David Attenbrough's programmes shyte, or The Sopranos, The Wire...?

If there are things like you say are worth watching I will pay to watch them, via Lovefilm or Netflix.
Regarding David Attenbrough's input I have purchased the Life box set that I can watch whenever I like. Hefty at £50 but I don't need a licence to watch it.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Collection-David-Atte...

[goldblum]

colonel c said:

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

It's a nice idea. Next time I'll ask them to give me some notice so I can bake a cake.

[NH1]

colonel c said:

So what’s the problem with letting these bods in and confirming that no one is watching live TV broadcasts.
Unless….?

The problem is you don't have to. They are a private company, they have no rights. Maybe we should have an inspection by the various gestapos every night, we could stand to attention by our beds whilst the Monday night inspection is by the environment agency to check we don't have fishing rods stashed away somewhere because we dont have a fishing licence. Tuesday could become DVLA's night for the people who don't have a driving licence. What about Wednesday when the bods from the civil aviation authority could pop round to see if we are hiding a 777 in out loft which we fly on a weekend without a pilots licence.

I'm sure there are enough different types to justify a bottom inspection 8 days a week if necessary, do you want the councils hygiene department ripping your kitchen to bits to see if you have sold any sandwiches without the correct licence to do that.

Very far fetched but if people wouldn't accept the above scenarios in real life what gives the TV licence any more standing than the others.

[Mojooo]

scorp said:

Cotty said:

This is the bit I don't get, why get a warrant to access the house. If you only need a licence to watch live TV what do they hope to achieve by gaining access, to catch you in the act.

If its to check whether you can receive a live signal. What is the point if the law only covers watching not having the ability to receive. So they check that you can receive but you are not actually watching.

Thousands of people get done for dodging the TV license every year. Even if an inspector saw you watching TV through a window how is this admissible as evidence ? It's your word against theirs. I suspect either people get busted out of self-incrimination or the legal system is broke and will happily convict people on hearsay.

That is not hearsay though - it is the direct evidence of the TVL officer. If you didn't allow witnesses to give evidence like that then the legal system would fall apart.

The question is, can TVL officers be trusted. You could then question the truthfulness of anyone who enforces the law (of which are are a lot)

Perhaps they should just wear video cams like the Police and that will settle all arguments.

[4v6]

Id just rather not fund an organisation that employs, promotes and shields pedophiles in the past and continues to do so today.
Not to mention its employment of "officers" who rape women for helping them or who lie about "interviews" of suspected offenders or those who assault people for filming them.

Tip of a very large iceberg I suspect.

[funkyrobot]

Cotty said:

AA999 said:

According to evidence on youtube it then goes:

8. Number of weeks later crapita and police turn up at doorstep with dodgy warrant based on made up evidence. Police force entry and allow crapita goons to look around. Crapita goons then state "you have the ability to receive live TV" and issue court proceedings against you.

That's about the size of it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_nRsnd2-Lo

Didn't that chap lose in the end and was fined at court?

[scorp]

Mojooo said:

That is not hearsay though - it is the direct evidence of the TVL officer. If you didn't allow witnesses to give evidence like that then the legal system would fall apart.

Of course, I was being a little facetious in my use of the word hearsay, my point is how do people get convicted if it is the word of an inspector against that of the accused, so people either self-incriminate themselves or the opinions of an inspector are treated as infallible. I thought people were innocent until proven guilty, one biased eye witness should not be enough to secure a conviction.

Mojooo said:

The question is, can TVL officers be trusted. You could then question the truthfulness of anyone who enforces the law (of which are are a lot)

Perhaps they should just wear video cams like the Police and that will settle all arguments.

Are people allowed to enter private property, say the garden to peek through the window with a recording device legally ?

[DonkeyApple]

4v6 said:

Id just rather not fund an organisation that employs, promotes and shields pedophiles in the past and continues to do so today.
Not to mention its employment of "officers" who rape women for helping them or who lie about "interviews" of suspected offenders or those who assault people for filming them.

Tip of a very large iceberg I suspect.

Ooh. We just stepped up the mental.

[DonkeyApple]

Looked around the web this morning for some articles on the best ways for people to swerve the license.

What is quite interesting from several websites is that this is a subject which attracts an army of crusties and citizen smiths. It's clear that a lot of people are still watching live broadcast after cancelling their license and it's clearly many use this subject as a tool to confront Big Brother etc. I love some of the comments such as 'the Tories have been after me since the Poll Tax Riots'.

Seemingly sensible:

http://fuelinjectedmoose.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/th...

http://money.aol.co.uk/2013/11/13/how-you-can-lega...

http://freshplastic.typepad.com/blog/2013/06/how-t...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2343323/40...

Getting quite mental:

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20...

http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/index.ph...