The internet licence fee: Viewers who watch TV on computer could be charged from next year, hints mi

The internet licence fee: Viewers who watch TV on computer could be charged from next year, hints minister

www.dailymail.c o.uk

Viewers who watch television on their computer could be forced to pay the licence fee as early as next year.
Those who do not own a TV but watch programmes on services such as the BBC's iPlayer do not have to pay the £145.50 annual charge.
But Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt yesterday hinted that this exemption could be stopped.
The Tory MP revealed that he plans to discuss the issue with BBC Director General Mark Thompson when the corporation's funding levels come up for review next year.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...

(visit the link for the full news article)

Yet more ways to tax the public....

Yes, looks like we won't be able to watch certain things on our computers now due to the BBC getting their hungry mitts on it... they want more cash so who do they want to stump up the cash? Us, me, you, the people.... as if we don't already have enough to pay for...

This will start with the BBC and then there will be others who will join simply because 'If the BBC can charge to watch programmes on the computer, why can't we' attitude!!

A lot of people have switched off their TV's to watch stuff on the computer for free and not pay a License but now o'm afraid it looks like they have picked up on this and have realised how much cash they are losing.

I'd like to know how they are going to monitor this anyhow?

I don't watch BBC... i'm thinking they'll be charging people who want to view their site only to watch BBC1, 2, 3 etc.... and will their be some kind of spy equipment installation which will see what programmes we watch and when?

A little more from the story:

It follows growing evidence that more television viewers are turning to online servies to watch their favourite programmes.

The BBC's technology chief Erik Huggers recently expressed concern that some viewers are getting 'a free ride' by watching its shows on the internet rather than on television.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...


www.dailymail.c o.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Been a waitin' fer that.
Good luck to them, the Internetz will go the way of the newspaper fast if they expect to get blood out of this turnip of a workforce.

This is how I propose they will go about it.

Your ISP will be logged to your tv licence and in order to view the content on the screen you will need to register and type in your barcode/licence number (another way to track you) once that has been done you will probably download a player that will record your every viewing.

Hopefully, these new draconian measures will deter people from watching TV and wake up the sleeping masses that sit in front of their boxes everyday as the world passes them by.

Thousands upon thousands of parents allow their children to sit mesmorised for hours on end watching endless soul destroying material that will have no beneficial effects for them whatsoever. I scream at the top of my lungs to no avail.

GET OUTSIDE AND ENJOY LIFE OUTDOORS


[edit on 26-7-2010 by franspeakfree]

This might get out of control. I hope no one else (government) gets wind of this. Theyll want there piece of the pie.

Weird... TV licence man came round the other evening. After convincing him we didn't watch TV (this is the truth) he was trying to tell us it is illegal to watch iPlayer and such without a licence, so I assumed it already was illegal to do this.

Obviously I'm not stupid enough to pay £130 per year to watch TV on my internet connection.

(I realize this is the UK, but it canhappen inAmerica too) so I will tell you how Ifeel about it, if you dont mind.

How are people getting a "free ride" by watching programs on the internet when the people PAY FOR THE INTERNET? Maybe they would be happier if I just cut out my whole TV expense alone, and went with straight internet.(evil laugh). If they would just keep their greedy fingers out of our pockets, maybe we wouldnt have to do such things.

Anything to take the little mans money.

You guys want a good site to watch TV and Movies? Go to LetMeWatchThis.com.

I found that site the most up to date, and easiest to use.

I actually just got done watching That 70s show just now (like I do every night).

Places like that keep going by donations and advertising, so if the BBC really wanted to make money off of it, they should start advertising their products there instead of making them the enemies. That in and of itself would create 'extra' revenue for them if they are really hurting that bad.
or T.V can start giving the people what they want; the truth. (I know I know, pun WAS intended on that one)


Edit- (and I am sorry, but Iknow nothing of how TV in the UK works with the whole "Liscensing fee" stuff). Hip me to the game if you want, id really like to know.



[edit on 26-7-2010 by Common Good]

To be fair the main UK channels have done a decent job as late as making programs available online even channel 4 lets you sit and watch full seasons of shows, it's quite a good way to see things you missed first time round. I'd say it's even starting to get to the stage where there no need for torrents or other methods and I have to applaud the attempt.

The delivery as yet isn't perfect though and some sites do suffer from buffering or poor video encoding and players.

As far as this story goes I'm OK because I already have a license but I think the idea of them trying to claim you need a special license for data packets on the Internet is ridiculous and would probably be laughed at legally in most other places.

Perhaps the ultimate solution is to offer a cheaper license for those people only watching on computers at least until the quality and size of picture matches up with TV's. I'm still against the whole Idea of a license myself but the BBC almost makes it worth it and I can see they do try to deliver even when they fail.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


So let me understand what you're saying...

Basically, you didn't want to pay a license fee, but enjoy BBC programming, so binned your telly in favour of the PC to watch it online through iPlayer.

Now they want to charge for that (and please consider the sheer cost of bandwidth your chewing up while using it) and you're whining because you will actually have to pay for something you use and enjoy, instead of using a technicallity to avoid coughing up like the rest of us?

It's a realtively piddly amount and no-one is forcing you to watch TV. If you can't afford it, don't use it!

I'm sorry, I can't be sympathetic to you unless you come up with a better argument other than "I want it free! I am upset my loophole workaround won't let me avoid paying anymore"..

I want a ferrari, but I can't afford one. Should I go and take one for a "test drive" and not bring it back, or should I just live without it? Same thing.



[edit on 26/7/10 by stumason]

reply to post by Common Good


A license fee is a fixed amount you have to pay each year (or broken into small montly payments) if you use or have in your home equipment able to recieve a TV signal. It basically pays for the BBC. Some love them, some loath them, but they are a pretty good content producer and are famed throughout the world with the BBC selling shows globally.

At the moment, the fee is around £130 a year, so about £11-12 a month. Small change really and I don't get why people begrudge paying it but still want the service, ie the BBC and it's content. It's basically stealing.

That taxation is already in place in Denmark where I live, they call it a "media" tax, and also they have put on a tax on any media which can hold mp3 tunes, from blank cd´s to memory sticks, hard discs you name the gadget and there is a tax on it.

Best regards

Loke.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Common Good

 

A license fee is a fixed amount you have to pay each year (or broken into small montly payments) if you use or have in your home equipment able to recieve a TV signal. It basically pays for the BBC. Some love them, some loath them, but they are a pretty good content producer and are famed throughout the world with the BBC selling shows globally.

At the moment, the fee is around £130 a year, so about £11-12 a month. Small change really and I don't get why people begrudge paying it but still want the service, ie the BBC and it's content. It's basically stealing.

Gotcha! Thanks

Yea, its real simple. If you want something, you have to pay for it.
I have cable, internet, phone all through one communicator.
But I have gotten to the point where I hardly use my tv anymore, and my phone, well it only rings when someone wants something. The only thing of value I have left that benefits me(really) is the internet. Sometimes, I can not for the life of me, find the programming I want to view on T.V, soI have to go to theinternet to watch what I want, whenI want, without having to pay extra fees for 'on demand' programming.
I dont look at it like I am stealing anything though, because I pay for both.

Thanks again.

I wonder how they would feel about the option of providing people who buy the license with a subsidised USB Freeview receiver I'm sure they could cut a deal and manage to supply them quite cheaply.
I'm thinking more as an incentive for people using only PC's at least then they would be able to receive a relatively full complement of channels and may consider the license worth it.

I have one of these myself and sometimes use it, it's quite convenient depending on the software it can give as much time shifting as you give it hard drive space (I use around 2 hours serious overkill I know) and probably around 60ish Freeview channels. The software I personally use actually can turn my pc on from sleep mode record a program then shut down again.

Thinking about it the License is worth it as long as they keep making Top Gear.

reply to post by Common Good


Ok, i was going to help you out but Stumason has jumped in ahead of me and stolen my thread!!!

edit to add: Only joking Stumason.... its cool..... i'm not on here all day so you can reply to the posters who want a reply from me....



BTW Stumason, i never said i watch the BBC.... i said i don't watch the BBC.... hardly ever watch any TV from the UK!!

PLEASE READ PROPERLY BEFORE REPLYING

[edit on 26-7-2010 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]

That seems reasonable to me. Where I live this has been so for years now. Even if you don't own a TV, you owe them the yearly fee for television services if you own any device that is able to broadcast Tv programs.

Honestly, it's a pain in the ass, and I hate paying it. But where I live the system is pretty fair even if it is overpriced. You can watch 100% of the broadcast programs on the net, so it's fair that you owe it.

I don't know how it is with the BBC. If residents in the UK can access 100% of the BBC's program online without a tv then I guess this is fair even though it sucks.

Not that I wish an internet where everything has to be paid for, but it was quite clear that things won't go on like this for long. Everything on the net is free even though the companies that provide the stuff lose money with most of the stuff.. The same with online newspapers... We were living in a golden era of free information... Nobody could expect this to go on forever.

I don’t want BBC or BBC IPlayer, I don’t want to pay for it or steal it I simply don’t want it. Can I watch ITV, Channel 4 or 5 etc without a license? No is the answer and you ask people from outside the UK about this and you seem to always get a very similar answer along the lines of unfairness and hope it doesn’t come to a land near them.

Democracy with state run media paid for though forced subscription!

I want TV YES!

I want BBC NO!

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


I dont see how it is fair. If you own a computer and use it to view youtube or ATS then why should you pay for TV. Why be forced to pay for what other people want, I say let those that want it pay for it and those that dont be left alone.

Oh hang on there must be more to this forced subscription, i wonder what it can be lol

Funny how years ago, they paid for TV with the ads.

Now they make you pay twice, watching their ads and making you pay for "Programming".......... I love the way they use that word.

Would you like to be programmed today?

I attempt not to watch too much programming, but when I do I do it without any ads and without paying any additional fees.

Sorry, I do not want the package of programming they give me here in the states. Let me see, do I really need the 5 or so sales networks, the 3 Network propagandist channels, the myriad of mind numbing MTV MTV2 blah blah, amongst the other garbage.

The thing that has turned me off from all Cable and Satellite providers is the fact that I cannot just pay for the maybe 6 channels I do watch. Nope, have to pay for all the other crud that is on the propagandist/programming tube.

I need the anonymous ISP provider coming out over there in one of your countries in Europe.

Sorry, I want my programming to not be decided by someone else. Give me the freedom to choose want I want to watch when I want to watch them.

If you know what I am talking about good, if not, well there you go. I think I may enjoy some BBC Doctor Who a little later.

Originally posted by coffeesniffer
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

 

I dont see how it is fair. If you own a computer and use it to view youtube or ATS then why should you pay for TV. Why be forced to pay for what other people want, I say let those that want it pay for it and those that dont be left alone.

Oh hang on there must be more to this forced subscription, i wonder what it can be lol

The system with state-sponsored television stations is always arbitrary, because there is no other way. Only the residents pay, not all who consume the content.
Think about it. The rule with such a system is that anyone who is capable of receiving such a broadcast needs to pay - if you own a TV nobody asks you if you have been watching the BBC - you pay if you watch it or not. Otherwise it wouldn't work - everybody would say " I have a TV but I don't watch BBC " and no one would pay. Since the system has been this way long since before the internet even existed it is only fair to widen the clauses to count in PC's too. If you already own a TV you won't have to pay double fees. But for the seldom found case of someone owning only a PC and not a TV the system remains the same: If you are able to receive the broadcast (which any PC with internet-connection is) then you owe the money, if you watch it or not.
State Television operates under the premise of being a public service, so it can't be financed by pay-per-view systems. The BBC considers itself - and lawfully is - a public service provided by the state, so everyone that is equipped to use the service is required to pay, if he uses it or not. Pretty much the same thing with Gas, Water and public transportation - there you also pay a certain amount for the infrastructure independantly of your use of it, at least in indirect ways with your taxes.

How long would the BBC exist if it was pay-per-view? Public Service oriented state-sponsored television stations just function that way. All they did was update the system to include PC's. And they have every right to, since PC's are included in the law - since a PC is a device that can receive their broadcast.

If you're fed up with the system for god's sake change it but do it fairly. Under the rules as they are it us perefectly fair to tax PC users for this since you also Tax TV users who not once use BBC... Look at it from a fairness-perspective and not from the " they want more money perspective "... As I said, if you own a TV you already paid this fee and won't have to double pay it... So for those 21 people who only own a PC and not a TV - though luck. The rest have been paying all the time, they'll survive it too.

If you're fed up with this, change the system but don't scold them for updating the traditional rules without changing their concept.

[edit on 26-7-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 26-7-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


You say that they can't restrict who is watching and people can simply say they dont watch BBC, well with PC's they can easily see who is and who is not viewing, they can restrict access and force subscription via the internet. There is no need to force all with PC's into paying for BBC.

They could have easily forced PC users to subscribe or accept terms of service for their web products and thus charge them. I would like someone to justify a blanket charge for all internet users of the UK into paying for this. The technology is there for freedom but the desire is not!