Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
I thought the distinction for whether you needed a license or not was whether the device had a TV tuner so a computer with monitor wouldn't normally need a license but if a TV tuner card was installed then a license would be needed. According to the TV licensing site they now claim that it's whether the device is used for live TV or not regardless if it's through an aerial or streamed.
The law was updated a few years ago. It is illegal to watch live TV on any device, or to watch TV programming on iPlayer on any device, without a licence. TV Licensing are telling the truth.
The distinction for mobile devices remains whether it is plugged in. If it's not plugged in you need a licence at home, if it's plugged in you need it where you are. Starbucks put signs up saying you couldn't watch TV in their stores if you were charging your phone. They weren't being difficult, they were protecting themselves.
As for the BBC, I find it amazing how a Venn Diagram of people who rail against "diversity" and who rail against BBC "turd" would usually look like this: O
I don't think the TV Tax should be a criminal matter either, FWIW, for mainly the same reasons I don't think fare evasion should be. Crapita can't be trusted with the power they have and they use it to exploit the most vulnerable.
If the BBC was funded from general taxation, then the government could use their budget as a weapon to get them to do what they wanted, undermining such impartiality.
The government choose the terms of the TV Licence, so the same thing applies anyway!
The bias does work both ways, when Labour were in the boss' chair the BBC sucked up to them too. But I do think sucking up to the current Conservative Party leaders is more an act of suicide than anything else.
The list of past BBC Board/Trust chairmen makes interesting reading!
Last edited: