Tv License Visit

[renegadeimp]

Maybe this time, but how are the tv "inspectors" going to know that? Even if the stream is delayed by 1-2 seconds, then it is not considered a live stream, but delayed stream and is not subject to the law. Thats why the BBC tried to get some set top boxes withdrawn a couple of years ago. Plus fromt he inspectors point of view, theres no way to be 100% sure it is a live stream. As they would be using a mobile device to receive their own broadcast and all mobile devices delay the stream by a few seconds due to bandwidth, buffering time etc.

 

 

It's not as clear cut as everyone is making it out to be.

[Mark my words]

Maybe not. But it really doesn't matter because the vast majority of defendants are convicted on the basis of their own confessions. TVL doesn't generally seek or capture physical evidence of evasion because it doesn't need to.

 

I would highly recommend that anyone who is interested in this issue spends an hour sitting in on one of the TVL sessions at their local court. It is a real eye-opener - British justice at its finest.

[renegadeimp]

I agree. Thats why people need educating. It's just unfortunate that the BBC and government have the majority of the population "brainwashed" into thinking they MUST pay.

[matt v atos]

Maybe this time, but how are the tv "inspectors" going to know that? Even if the stream is delayed by 1-2 seconds, then it is not considered a live stream, but delayed stream and is not subject to the law. Thats why the BBC tried to get some set top boxes withdrawn a couple of years ago. Plus fromt he inspectors point of view, theres no way to be 100% sure it is a live stream. As they would be using a mobile device to receive their own broadcast and all mobile devices delay the stream by a few seconds due to bandwidth, buffering time etc.

 

 

It's not as clear cut as everyone is making it out to be.

 

because the gear they use unlike mine will tell them thats its real time ie live

[renegadeimp]

There isnt any gear like that though. It is impossible to detect simply because of the inherent nature of latency. Each connection would be completely different in regards to latency. Even the connections these hand held devices they claim to have, yet no proof exists of them.

[matt v atos]

There isnt any gear like that though. It is impossible to detect simply because of the inherent nature of latency. Each connection would be completely different in regards to latency. Even the connections these hand held devices they claim to have, yet no proof exists of them.

 

i did using head phones and a direction mic with a pre amp to boost input signal I spilt the left and right channels on the left input feed receiving live tv bb1 bbc2 itv 3 ect on the right channel the direction mic with a pre amp to boost input aimed it next door and got a match next door tv was tuned to ITV 2 in real time

[renegadeimp]

Yes, i saw. But you still had no idea if it was actually live or delayed by a few seconds. You may have had a good idea, but not enough proof ( if you were an "inspector") to do anything with that info.

 

If the stream is delayed, even by 1-2 seconds, it can no longer be considered a live broadcast. The BBC and other channels make it out to be, but since it's delayed, its actually considered to technically be a recording. Same thing with the olympic opening ceremony in the US.

 

It might be an extreme example but The US portrayed it as a live event but that was shown 6 hours later.

[matt v atos]

Yes, i saw. But you still had no idea if it was actually live or delayed by a few seconds. You may have had a good idea, but not enough proof ( if you were an "inspector") to do anything with that info.

 

If the stream is delayed, even by 1-2 seconds, it can no longer be considered a live broadcast. The BBC and other channels make it out to be, but since it's delayed, its actually considered to technically be a recording. Same thing with the olympic opening ceremony in the US.

 

It might be an extreme example but The US portrayed it as a live event but that was shown 6 hours later.

 

There was no delay it was realtime trust me

[renegadeimp]

Oh i understand that. But im talking generally now. It is very easy to delay the transmission on the users side. Thats why the BBC tried so hard to get those set top boxes stopped.

[matt v atos]

Oh by the way I was hearing the feed from the live transmission in my left ear and the transmission from next door in my right ear and both matched dead on

Edited March 25, 2013 by matt v atos

[Mark my words]

The required delay has not been tested in Court. I believe that TVL advise 2 hours.

 

This is going to become important if broadcasters continue to release material for download before broadcast.

[matt v atos]

I did this just to see if was true

 

I don't know why but something came to mind today after reading the posts on this thread i remember a guy has been keeping his letters from TVL and said most are the usual if you are watching tv you need blar blar blar then one came saying the the same thing but at the bottom it said our enforcement officer will call with a high power hand held sound device to detect what you are watching so of course he dismissed it as proper gander as you would

 

So I have checked this out, went to my girlfriends mums house what i did using head phones and a direction mic with a pre amp to boost input signal I spilt the left and right channels on the left input feed receiving live tv bb1 bbc2 itv 3 ect on the right channel the direction mic with a pre amp to boost input aimed it next door and got a match next door tv was tuned to ITV 2 this was proof that it can be done

Edited March 25, 2013 by matt v atos

[matt v atos]

The required delay has not been tested in Court. I believe that TVL advise 2 hours.

 

This is going to become important if broadcasters continue to release material for download before broadcast.

don 'think that's what the the TVL are looking at.

[Bazooka Boo]

The legislation quoted is delegated (Secondary) legislation from the parent legislation which would be the Communications Act 2003

Exactly, the communications "ACT" not law.

 

Unlawful is defined as a breach stipulated by law, or contrary to law

Agreed.

illegal is defined as a breach of a known rule (illegal move in chess as an example) or laws of contract

Where is your contract with the BBC? A 'known rule' NOT law.

legal is more the substance of the law

Legal, is legislation, nothing to do with law.

 

then we have criminal law, believe it or not, murder is not a statutory criminal offence, it is an offence under common law

Now were getting somewhere, agreed, Murder is an offence under 'common law' which is 'No harm, loss, or fraud (including breach of the peace)

 

all legislation can be described as some form of law, or an accepted rule

Ah ha, there we have it, legislation is NOT law, legislation is, as you have said 'an accepted rule', but I will elaborate on the actual wording, it is "A legislative 'rule' of society, given the force of law by the consent of the governed"

 

I'm not picking holes Squad by any means, I'm just making sure I have grasped this'

 

There is no law that states you have to have a licence, there is however legislation.

There is no contract between any of us and the BBC to gift them money every year, only legislation.

 

The only way YOU can make that contract with them, is by either giving them your name/details so they can draw up this contract or to allow them entry to your private property.

 

I have a contract for my internet, they have sent me T&C's to go with that contract, if I am not happy with the product then I have recourse I am able to take against them, I am allowed to choose, of my own free will, if I wish to remain with or change too another provider.

 

The BBC, does not give you this democratic choice, they systematically and criminally send out threatening harassment letters to every household on a daily basis if that household does not have one of their licences, this continues until you either purchase one or you drop dead.

SKY TV, has a contract, Virgin media, has a contract, Talk Talk etc etc, the clue is in the name British Broadcasting 'corporation' all corporations work for profit, nothing else.

 

I don't have DVLA sending me threatening letters because I haven't got a driving licence?

Nor the Civil Aviation Authority because I don't have a pilots licence, yet we seem to have become so numb in the head that we blindly accept that we need to have a TVL? Never had one never will, they can send all the deforestation they like, they can send all the search warrants with police in toe all they like, they are never being allowed access to my private home, as my home is private for private activities only, not to allow corporate nobody's attempt to assert their corporate garbage on me.

[porkyp1g]

I'm not picking holes Squad by any means, I'm just making sure I have grasped this'

 

There is no law that states you have to have a licence, there is however legislation.

There is no contract between any of us and the BBC to gift them money every year, only legislation.

 

The only way YOU can make that contract with them, is by either giving them your name/details so they can draw up this contract or to allow them entry to your private property.

 

I have a contract for my internet, they have sent me T&C's to go with that contract, if I am not happy with the product then I have recourse I am able to take against them, I am allowed to choose, of my own free will, if I wish to remain with or change too another provider.

 

The BBC, does not give you this democratic choice, they systematically and criminally send out threatening harassment letters to every household on a daily basis if that household does not have one of their licences, this continues until you either purchase one or you drop dead.

SKY TV, has a contract, Virgin media, has a contract, Talk Talk etc etc, the clue is in the name British Broadcasting 'corporation' all corporations work for profit, nothing else.

 

I don't have DVLA sending me threatening letters because I haven't got a driving licence?

Nor the Civil Aviation Authority because I don't have a pilots licence, yet we seem to have become so numb in the head that we blindly accept that we need to have a TVL? Never had one never will, they can send all the deforestation they like, they can send all the search warrants with police in toe all they like, they are never being allowed access to my private home, as my home is private for private activities only, not to allow corporate nobody's attempt to assert their corporate garbage on me.

 

Do you watch live tv?

[porkyp1g]

Yes, i saw. But you still had no idea if it was actually live or delayed by a few seconds. You may have had a good idea, but not enough proof ( if you were an "inspector") to do anything with that info.

 

If the stream is delayed, even by 1-2 seconds, it can no longer be considered a live broadcast. The BBC and other channels make it out to be, but since it's delayed, its actually considered to technically be a recording. Same thing with the olympic opening ceremony in the US.

 

It might be an extreme example but The US portrayed it as a live event but that was shown 6 hours later.

 

All tv is not live if you class one or two seconds as not live. Watching live tv is watching what is being broadcast at that time. If they see or hear you watching a program that is on the tv listings as being on at the time, you're going to be asking for trouble. Be interesting to know to what limits they would prosecute on as being live tv. You could hit the pause button for two minutes, then resume playing, but for me your still watching live tv.

 

It's clear from the YouTube vids some folk enjoy the aggro the fact they can defend their house and safety, what's not clear in a lot of the cases is whether they are hiding the fact they actually watch live tv, bbc or otherwise.

[renegadeimp]

The thing is, you are talking about licence evaders. I was discussing the concept and indeed the reality of people having equipment to delay what they receive. Yes, it may be "live" as its being broadcast, but its not live on your tv. It's reaching it a few minutes later.

 

The problem lies in that the technicalities of the law arent defined at all. Infact they arent even outlined very well. Thats where all the confusion comes from. Personally, as i said further back in the thread, im of the camp that just wants the BBC to put adverts on their channels, or utilise some kind of system where you need a decoder to receive their shows/radio.

 

Personally i do not watch any BBC shows, nor do i listen to any BBC Radio broadcasts that are live. If anything, i watch them on iplayer or another source a few days later IF i deem them to be worth watching ( which is very rare). So why should i pay them? I've yet to get any kind of coherent and logical answer on that.

[MrHat]

Sub

[Mark my words]

I was discussing the concept and indeed the reality of people having equipment to delay what they receive. Yes, it may be "live" as its being broadcast, but its not live on your tv. It's reaching it a few minutes later.

 

How are they being delayed - if it is some kind of recording, you sill need a licence.

[renegadeimp]

Nope. Licence only applies to live recordings or equipment capable of receiving live transmissions.

[Bazooka Boo]

Do you watch live tv?

I am normally alive when I watch it yes, depends if the cork has fell out of the vin rouge?

 

This is quite an emotive subject which is going off in tangents, I know what I know, and I am quite happy to be licence free, and more than happy to put any footage of their failure to force me to contract with them, on tinternet as and when, but as a rule of thumb, no contact is the preferred method.

[porkyp1g]

I am normally alive when I watch it yes, depends if the cork has fell out of the vin rouge?

 

This is quite an emotive subject which is going off in tangents, I know what I know, and I am quite happy to be licence free, and more than happy to put any footage of their failure to force me to contract with them, on tinternet as and when, but as a rule of thumb, no contact is the preferred method.

 

nice one, but I didn't type alive. I typed live.

[huttonwhitewash]

I am normally alive when I watch it yes, depends if the cork has fell out of the vin rouge?

 

This is quite an emotive subject which is going off in tangents, I know what I know, and I am quite happy to be licence free, and more than happy to put any footage of their failure to force me to contract with them, on tinternet as and when, but as a rule of thumb, no contact is the preferred method.

 

It is indeed the best policy to get rid of these & other Doorstep salesmen. If they do not listen to: "Not today thank you" Then a "Go forth & multiply" usually works.

L.H.

[Bazooka Boo]

nice one, but I didn't type alive. I typed live.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to be flippant....

 

Lets just say that I am extremely confident in dealing with any chancer who knocks my door, I will never be threatened or intimidated enough to listen to the medias lies, and certainly I will never follow the rest of the sheep, each to their own.

 

I am causing no-one any harm, they can spit and shout and change legislation as much as they like to fit their ideology, but they are morally bankrupt and I will not be forced to follow their rules.

[MaxxPower]

Sorry, didn't mean to be flippant....

 

Lets just say that I am extremely confident in dealing with any chancer who knocks my door, I will never be threatened or intimidated enough to listen to the medias lies, and certainly I will never follow the rest of the sheep, each to their own.

 

I am causing no-one any harm, they can spit and shout and change legislation as much as they like to fit their ideology, but they are morally bankrupt and I will not be forced to follow their rules.

 

So in other words, you do watch Live TV but knowingly don't pay for a TV License?

I don't think you can really accuse the TV License people of being the ones morally wrong here if that's the case....