Reminder Secure

No TV license and better progs.

diipii is off-line
20 November 2012 08:34
diipii
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Worcestershire


I have been considering not having a TV set any more and sourcing all my entertainment from the net.
This has partly been inspired by the low quality of programming these days plus my urge not to pay a license fee for it.
These days I watch Frasier in the morning and the news at 6pm then, if I feel like it, on to the net for all my fave shows on YT and various iPlayer like sites.
Has anyone else set this up and what sites do you find the best for your entertainment needs ?

Have a look at this:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1492719

Good idea ?


It only happens all the time.


Neil Anderson is off-line
20 November 2012 08:51
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
Location
United Kingdom
London
West London

Yes you wouldn't want to pay for programmes to be made when you can get other people's intellectual property for free.
But don't let that stop you complaining about people expecting to steal your photos.
Like any dealer he was watching for the card that is so high and wild he'll never need to deal another...


Anthonygh is off-line
20 November 2012 09:09
anthonyh
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Kent


The license fee is actually a tax on receiving live broadcasts from any source.

This means you can be prosecuted if you watch a streamed show (being broadcast live at the time) to your computer...even if that show originates from another country.

To answer the response above...the bulk of stuff on TV is financed from private industry, not public funds or taxes, so the question of intellectual property rights when watching programmes not from the BBC doesn't arise.


Tony Stephenson is off-line
20 November 2012 09:35
tonycsm
Photographer
tonycsm
Location
United Kingdom
East Yorkshire
Driffield

If you decide not to have a TV, watch out for the TV licencing lot! About 11 years ago I decided not to watch TV and therefore didn't purchase a TV licence - that's when my problems started!!!
I got sick of them sending letters repeatedly with such things in large letters on the envelope as  ' A TV licencing vehicle will be visiting YOUR street very soon' and the rest of their intimidating calls, even when I'd told them I didn't even have a TV plugged in or watch it. I even invited them to call on me at any time and I would allow them in to check, but it still went on.

It was absolutely  incessant and went on until I finally flipped and sent the head of the department responsible, a recorded letter with the envelope having a message in large red print that ' A solicitors letter would be visiting him very soon ' - surprisingly, it all stopped and I never heard from them again! I feel sorry for the elderly who are very intimidated by such bullying tactics - these TV licencing people don't seem to understand that some people just don't watch TV! Of course, after a couple of years my partner moved in and I had to get one as she loved watching it!

The TV licence is no more than a draconian tax levied on everyone which actually affects the poorest in our society! At the very least, a TV licence fee should be based on ability to pay through income taxation. It's grossly unfair to expect the poorest in our society to pay this tax! Better still, why not do away with it and let the BBC become self funding just as it is for terrestrial commercial TV broadcasters? 
www.le-femme.co.uk


Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
20 November 2012 09:44
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Location
United Kingdom
Buckinghamshire
Stoke Mandeville

Quote from tonycsm
If you decide not to have a TV, watch out for the TV licencing lot! About 11 years ago I decided not to watch TV and therefore didn't purchase a TV licence - that's when my problems started!!!
I got sick of them sending letters repeatedly with such things in large letters on the envelope as  ' A TV licencing vehicle will be visiting my street very soon' and the rest of their intimidating calls, even when I'd told them I didn't even have a TV plugged in or watch it. I even invited them to call on me at any time and I would allow them in to check, but it still went on.

It was absolutely  incessant and went on until I finally flipped and sent the head of the department responsible, a recorded letter with the envelope having a message in large red print that ' A solicitors letter would be visiting him very soon ' - surprisingly, it all stopped and I never heard from them again! I feel sorry for the elderly who are very intimidated by such bullying tactics - these TV licencing people don't seem to understand that some people just don't watch TV! Of course, after a couple of years my partner moved in and I had to get one as she loved watching it!

The TV licence is no more than a draconian tax levied on everyone which actually affects the poorest in our society! At the very least, a TV licence fee should be based on ability to pay through income taxation. It's grossly unfair to expect the poorest in our society to pay this tax! Better still, why not do away with it and let the BBC become self funding just as it is for terrestrial commercial TV broadcasters? 



The TV licence used to cover ownership of  a UHF receiver - whether you used it or not was your prerogative.  If you owned a TV or any other device with UHF tuner you were legally required to obtain a licence.

No end of people got stung with satellite services for this reason as they didn't appreciate their TVs still had UHF tuners built-in even though they weren't using them (and using their satellite boxes via SCART instead)
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.


Matt Harper is off-line
20 November 2012 09:48
mattharper
Photographer
mattharper
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Paignton

Quote from tonycsm
The TV licence is no more than a draconian tax levied on everyone which actually affects the poorest in our society! At the very least, a TV licence fee should be based on ability to pay through income taxation. It's grossly unfair to expect the poorest in our society to pay this tax! Better still, why not do away with it and let the BBC become self funding just as it is for terrestrial commercial TV broadcasters? 




Why should it, or anything else for that matter, be priced according to the ability to pay?
Tesco don't do that, nor do Skoda or Rolls Royce.  Just because you are poor, it doesn't mean you should be able to get something cheaper than someone with more money.  If you want something, this s the price, your choice. 

All these people who "can't afford it" have smart phones, flat screen TVs, latest fashion clothing and so on. Half of them smoke, and that's a hefty cost to bare nowadays.  So, someone who is on benefits, smokes and has a smart phone should have a TV licence cheaper than the rest of us, should they?  Not in my book, they shouldn't. 

As far as I am concerned, the TV licence provides me with a few channels that haven't got tedious bloody adverts all the time, showing programmes for the illiterate and brain dead tossers who don't or can't appreciate a decent programme when there is one on. 

Sorry Tony, I agree with most of your comments, I must be blobbing today 




Anthonygh is off-line
20 November 2012 09:48
anthonyh
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Kent


All standard rate taxes are a means to redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich.....in that the poor pay a much greater proportion of their income in fixed taxes than the rich.

The same is true of standing charges etc.....my home energy per unit used cost me a lot more than what Cameron is paying.


Tony Stephenson is off-line
20 November 2012 09:49
tonycsm
Photographer
tonycsm
Location
United Kingdom
East Yorkshire
Driffield

Quote from RedChecker
The TV licence used to cover ownership of  a UHF receiver - whether you used it or not was your prerogative.  If you owned a TV or any other device with UHF tuner you were legally required to obtain a licence.

No end of people got stung with satellite services for this reason as they didn't appreciate their TVs still had UHF tuners built-in even though they weren't using them (and using their satellite boxes via SCART instead)




I'm just surprised that they didn't introduce a vacuum cleaner or fridge tax! It's unvelievable in the 21st century that they still have a tax on TV ownership! Next thing you know they'll be introducing a tax on insurance policies....oh hang on a minu....
www.le-femme.co.uk


Anthonygh is off-line
20 November 2012 09:55
anthonyh
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Kent


Quote from tonycsm
I'm just surprised that they didn't introduce a vacuum cleaner or fridge tax! It's unvelievable in the 21st century that they still have a tax on TV ownership! Next thing you know they'll be introducing a tax on insurance policies....oh hang on a minu....



They don't...there is no requirement to pay the license fee because you own a TV...it is using it (or any device) to receive live broadcasts (excluding radio that is).



Matt Harper is off-line
20 November 2012 09:56
mattharper
Photographer
mattharper
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Paignton

What was really missed was a licence for a mobile phone.
None of us would have ever argued with a licence at say (today's prices) £20. We would have accepted it in a blink of an eye.
How many mobile phones are there in the UK, something crazy like 20 million. Multiply by £20, pays a few bills, dunnit?



16 Users currently online   Blue=Models Orange=Photographers Red=Agencies Purple=MUA/Stylists Grey=Studios Green=Moderators
alishaa chosin
AaronKent bengie evopro George99 Ladiesman mlp Njsphotography Photogenic2 skymouse Snooper911 stevegosh Steveh32 Thunder_Photos TinDolls