BBC Live Player and the TV License

[Fetchez la vache]

I've noticed the last week that the BBC website seems to be streaming its live feed from Wimbledon, which is fine, but what if you don't have a TV license.

I thought that you had to have some "receiving equipment" which meant in the past either a TV set or a receiver card for a pc. I have neither, just a laptop with a web browser, and also have no TV License for my mid-week flat. I'm not a fan of the tennis anyway and haven't actually been watching it, but was wondering where this puts people - chances are that this sort of thing may increase in the future.

I'm guessing that it isn't really a live feed (I can;t tell as I have no TV) but if so its a real grey area... tv on peoples phones etc etc...

p.s. God knows which forum this should be in so I'll start here

[Puggit]

What's a 'license' ?

[10 Pence Short]

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself.

The public service elements are in no way neutral as they should be and the rest is so lacking in quality compared to the past that I really don't see why I should pay for it.

The thought of my licence fee going towards some tracksuited Waynetta watching C8nts Dancing On Stuff make me shudder. And not in a good way.

[touching cloth]

Puggit said:

What's a 'license' ?

Awesome, within 60 seconds of posting too.. excellent work

[Fetchez la vache]

Puggit said:

What's a 'license' ?

you missed the wrong capitalisation of TV, and semi colon instead of an apostrophe. 3/10. Keep up at the back if you want to be a real spelling nazi

[Man-At-Arms]

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

[10 Pence Short]

Man-At-Arms said:

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

As opposed to a stty channel with no adverts which I have to pay for but dont want?

At least I don't have to pay for the others.

[MiniMan64]

10 Pence Short said:

Man-At-Arms said:

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

As opposed to a stty channel with no adverts which I have to pay for but dont want?

At least I don't have to pay for the others.

stty channel? Christ I'd have BBC any day of the week, ITV can fk off! The channels are better, the programmes are better and the services are better? Top Gear, the sports coverage is awesome (the tennis and the F1 just two examples), the I Player is a fantastic bit of kit (compared to ITV's rubbish copy) and no bloody adverts, genius! Don't forget all the radio channels as well.

I'd pay my £120 a year for the Formula 1 and tennis coverage alone.

[TVC]

Fetchez la vache said:

I've noticed the last week that the BBC website seems to be streaming its live feed from Wimbledon, which is fine, but what if you don't have a TV license.

I thought that you had to have some "receiving equipment" which meant in the past either a TV set or a receiver card for a pc. I have neither, just a laptop with a web browser, and also have no TV License for my mid-week flat. I'm not a fan of the tennis anyway and haven't actually been watching it, but was wondering where this puts people - chances are that this sort of thing may increase in the future.

I'm guessing that it isn't really a live feed (I can;t tell as I have no TV) but if so its a real grey area... tv on peoples phones etc etc...

It's fairly well defined:
A licence is required to watch/record programmes as they're being shown on TV.
BBC live feeds are shown as they're being shown on TV.

It wouldn't surprise me if TV Licensing try at some point to claim a legal basis for requiring ISPs/carriers to hand over browsing records...

ETC licenCe

Edited by TVC on Thursday 2nd July 11:47

[Pwig]

MiniMan64 said:

10 Pence Short said:

Man-At-Arms said:

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

As opposed to a stty channel with no adverts which I have to pay for but dont want?

At least I don't have to pay for the others.

stty channel? Christ I'd have BBC any day of the week, ITV can fk off! The channels are better, the programmes are better and the services are better? Top Gear, the sports coverage is awesome (the tennis and the F1 just two examples), the I Player is a fantastic bit of kit (compared to ITV's rubbish copy) and no bloody adverts, genius! Don't forget all the radio channels as well.

I'd pay my £120 a year for the Formula 1 and tennis coverage alone.

What he said

The BBC are making the best programs out there at the moment.

[Eric Mc]

Look folks - this is the UK.

Over here we use the noun LICENCE and the noun PROGRAMME (when referring to TV and non-computer applications).

We aren't all Yankified yet.

[Moonhawk]

Fetchez la vache said:

Puggit said:

What's a 'license' ?

you missed the wrong capitalisation of TV, and semi colon instead of an apostrophe. 3/10. Keep up at the back if you want to be a real spelling nazi

Edited by Moonhawk on Thursday 2nd July 10:20

[Neil_H]

10 Pence Short said:

Man-At-Arms said:

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

As opposed to a stty channel with no adverts which I have to pay for but dont want?

At least I don't have to pay for the others.

If it had to fend for itself the quality would decline further, as their survival would depend on appealling to the moronic masses.

As it is, they still make documentaries, for example. How many decent documentaries have you ever seen on ITV?

[The Black Flash]

They did propose making the tv licence apply to PCs, some time last year IIRC, for exactly this reason.

I'm firmly in the "scrap it" boat myself. I barely ever watch the beeb because I choose to pay for Sky instead. Oh, but I can't do it "instead", it has to be "as well". Very fair.

[fivesixseven8]

Fetchez la vache said:

I've noticed the last week that the BBC website seems to be streaming its live feed from Wimbledon, which is fine, but what if you don't have a TV license.

I thought that you had to have some "receiving equipment" which meant in the past either a TV set or a receiver card for a pc. I have neither, just a laptop with a web browser, and also have no TV License for my mid-week flat. I'm not a fan of the tennis anyway and haven't actually been watching it, but was wondering where this puts people - chances are that this sort of thing may increase in the future.

I'm guessing that it isn't really a live feed (I can;t tell as I have no TV) but if so its a real grey area... tv on peoples phones etc etc...

p.s. God knows which forum this should be in so I'll start here

Technically you "need" one as you are watching a live feed (it is live too btw.)

Don't bother though.

[10 Pence Short]

Neil_H said:

10 Pence Short said:

Man-At-Arms said:

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

As opposed to a stty channel with no adverts which I have to pay for but dont want?

At least I don't have to pay for the others.

If it had to fend for itself the quality would decline further, as their survival would depend on appealling to the moronic masses.

As it is, they still make documentaries, for example. How many decent documentaries have you ever seen on ITV?

The production companies making programming for the BBC are no better than the ones making stuff for commercial channels.

The difference is, instead of 3 minutes of commercial adverts between programs, you get 3 minutes of BBC adverts between them.

There are no decent documentaries being produced these days because, unless they are so over-the-top they can make their own headlines, they're not going to be able to sell them to any network.


This is the age of spaccer-TV.

[Neil_H]

10 Pence Short said:

Neil_H said:

10 Pence Short said:

Man-At-Arms said:

10 Pence Short said:

I would prefer it if the BBC lost its 'state' status and had to fend for itself

that'll be another channel with stty programmes and ruddy adverts every 10 minutes then

As opposed to a stty channel with no adverts which I have to pay for but dont want?

At least I don't have to pay for the others.

If it had to fend for itself the quality would decline further, as their survival would depend on appealling to the moronic masses.

As it is, they still make documentaries, for example. How many decent documentaries have you ever seen on ITV?

The production companies making programming for the BBC are no better than the ones making stuff for commercial channels.

The difference is, instead of 3 minutes of commercial adverts between programs, you get 3 minutes of BBC adverts between them.

There are no decent documentaries being produced these days because, unless they are so over-the-top they can make their own headlines, they're not going to be able to sell them to any network.


This is the age of spaccer-TV.

The NASA one last night was pretty good.

[10 Pence Short]

I try to avoid watching the wretched thing as much as possible, so on that NASA one, I wouldn't know.

Once the evening news on BBC started to sound more patronising than The Sun, I realised I was probably out of their target audience.

[fivesixseven8]

10 Pence Short said:

I try to avoid watching the wretched thing as much as possible, so on that NASA one, I wouldn't know.

Once the evening news on BBC started to sound more patronising than The Sun, I realised I was probably out of their target audience.

I'll agree the news is dire. But the James May space programme last night was excellent. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.

[10 Pence Short]

fivesixseven8 said:

10 Pence Short said:

I try to avoid watching the wretched thing as much as possible, so on that NASA one, I wouldn't know.

Once the evening news on BBC started to sound more patronising than The Sun, I realised I was probably out of their target audience.

I'll agree the news is dire. But the James May space programme last night was excellent. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.

A good proportion of PH users think Top Gear is good. I think I'll leave the reviews to myself.