In the UK, you must pay if you are capable of receiving live TV, not only if you do receive live TV. Even if it was never switch on, a TV that is plugged into an aerial qualifies as meeting that requirement.
That is absolutely 1000000% not true. You only have to pay the TV Licence if you ever watch live TV, not if you merely have a televion set. I've never paid the fee because I don't watch live TV, ever, and when you go on the TV licence page to fill out the form why you don't need a licence, one of the options on the form is "I only use my TV for games consoles, netflix, dvd players etc".
So it's not some "clever hack" - the law specifically allows for not paying the licence fee if you own a TV set but don't watch live TV.
It's unhelpful to disagree with someone on a point of fact and to decline to provide a decent source. The result is that you've given the reader no reason to take your word over the other person's.
From what I can tell, your account of things is accurate. On the website [0][1][2] the requirements aren't concerned at all with what equipment you own or with how it's set up, only with the act of watching or recording live television broadcasts over any technology, including over the Internet. I imagine it still wouldn't hurt to disconnect your TV from the means to show live broadcasts, for the tiny off-chance things end up in court.
I think spuz's account may have been accurate in pre-Internet days, but this seems harder to verify.
Thanks for the clarification. It's possible that what I said used to be true but looks like it is no longer the case. It's also possible that in the pre-internet days, the fact that you had your TV connected to an aerial was used as strong circumstantial evidence that you actually watched live TV but it was never actually used as the sole basis to fine you.
> Live TV means any programme you watch or record as it’s being shown on TV or live on an online TV service.
I find the wording here fascinating. Is watching a live stream over the YouTube app on my TV 'live TV'? Is watching a UFC event on the UFC app? What about the website?
What is TV? Is a monitor? A monitor with an aerial? Video content transmitted over certain bands?
>I find the wording here fascinating. Is watching a live stream over the YouTube app on my TV 'live TV'? Is watching a UFC event on the UFC app? What about the website?
If it's broadcast simultaneously by other means (e.g. satellite, cable, terrestrial transmitter etc.) it counts as "live TV".
Yep, it technically does. If there is a live channel on Youtube showing say a football match, then yes, technically you have to pay a TV licence for watching it, since the same match is broadcast on a TV channel.
I don't think the policy is that ridiculous, it's just that it's one of these where certain edge cases like this one can be safely ignored. You will be tracked and found if you use the BBC iPlayer without having paid the licence, you will not be found out for watching some random live youtube channel. It's an imperfect rule for a complex world.
> If there is a live channel on Youtube showing say a football match, then yes, technically you have to pay a TV licence for watching it
Sky offer a streaming service in the UK called NowTV which includes live TV streaming of their channels, as well as Netflix-style on-demand streaming from their library. They're very upfront that a TV licence is needed if you wish you watch their live channels over NowTV, [0] but one is not required for on-demand streaming.
You're right except a few years ago the law was amended to include the licence requirement for watching anything on BBC iPlayer whether live or not. Other streaming services remain free.
I own a pile of antennas for ham radio, I own a bunch of TV tuners, because they're usable as software controlled ham radio receivers, I own a television, and I own a laptop that sometimes gets plugged into that television.
That might make me look pretty guilty, but my TV isn't connected to an antenna, and I don't watch broadcast TV.
The bar for evidence of a violation needs to be higher. It's possible to own all of the equipment without ever having violated the BBC's licensing rule.
You can have and use TV and not pay, so long as you can reasonably show you are not receiving live broadcasts (if it ever came to a warrant being issued). Not having it plugged into an aerial and the channel presets not tuned is considered proof enough.
I'd guess with more and more watching via the internet they probably have far more success catching people watch live broadcasts via IP addresses and ISP logs these days though.
(Emphasis mine)
This "playing fast and loose with language" that they do (and that you inadvertently did too, just now) makes me so irrationally angry.
Why would the burden of proof be that low? They need (should need?) to prove that you received broadcast television, not that you simply owned a TV.
We hear these stories about TV detector vans as if finding a TV set was ever sufficient evidence.