Re: Tv license question

Palindrome wrote:
Alex wrote:
At 22:20:39 on 09/06/2007, Palindrome delighted uk.legal by announcing:


Alex Heney wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 10:01:56 +0100, johannes
<johs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Paladin wrote:


?Q wrote:


If you have a tv but do not have any channels tuned in nor
any receiving equipment set up.
It is soley used for playing dvds and games consoles do you
require a Tv License?
This is the only TV in the household. No sky NTL etc
subscription either.




If you have any equipment capable of recieving TV then you need
a license.


"If you have any equipment..." is by far too meaningless. You can
have a TV that is not tuned and not connected to an antenna. Then
it is not capable of receiving TV.
But to be on the safe side, you have to make it plain it can't be
used as a TV receiver.


Only if you so wish.

They will NOT win in court unless they can prove that you were
actually watching/recording it.

In theory, they could win if they caught you in the act of
installing it, but then they would have to prove that you were
installing it for the purpose of receiving programmes. Which would
be difficult.

I have never quite understood why they bothered to put "install" in
the regulations.

I find it difficult to believe that anyone has ever been prosecuted
for it.

It would be quite difficult (OK, not very difficult) to install a tv
system without receiving live broadcast at some time during the
installation process. So anyone installing could, potentially, be
charged with use - professional tv installers excepted.


I believe that it's specifically to install with the intent to receive
broadcasts. If there's no intent then there's no offence.


You could, I suppose, claim that you weren't using the system for the
purpose of receiving broadcast transmissions, but for the purpose of
installing a system capable of receiving broadcast transmissions and
that the actual reception was a side effect and not the reason.

I could take a 14" VGA monitor, run a wire from one of the pins of
the 15D socket to a dustbin lid and notify TVL that I had installed a
system for the purpose of receiving tv broadcasts. That would,
presumably, be all that they would need to seek a conviction under
the "install" clause, if I was unlicenced. I don't think that the law
differentiates between crimes carried out in a technically unviable
manner and those that could work...


If it doesn't meet the definition of a receiver then there's no
offence. I doubt very much that your invention would qualify.

What "definition of a receiver"?

Let's assume that I am an entirely competent electronics engineer and I design, prototype and install a (working) tv broadcast reception system, for the purpose of receiving broadcast tv. Did I need a licence to design and build it? Clearly not. Did I need a licence to install it? Not being a professional installer, then, clearly yes - I did need a licence to install it..Do I need a licence to use it? Clearly yes.

Now, let's asssume that the design was faulty and the sound appeared distorted when I try to use it. Would the offence of installing without a licence still hold? Of course. Would an offence of using it without licence apply? Of course.

Now go down the slope of faulty design to one that was unviable - it would never have worked. Is it an offence to install a faulty tv system, for the purpose of receiving broadcast tv - and does it depend on how faulty?

I would suggest that the extent of the fault does not matter in law. Even if the fault was such as to make the objective of receiving broadcast tv impossible.

For example, IIUC, if you attempt to murder someone using a non-poison that you believed to be poisonous - it is the same offence as if you had used a viable poison.

So, I assume that it is the same offence to install a non-functioning tv that you believe will work as it would be to install a functioning tv..

That's why a conviction will only follow when you are caught actually watching TV, regardless of how the law reads is or what Mr Know-all Heney might say (from within his lonely, sad box). Normally this is the person that answers the door to an inspector with the TV blaring out Eastenders or Corry St.

TomT
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Tv license question
    ... it is not capable of receiving TV. ... I believe that it's specifically to install with the intent to receive ... If there's no intent then there's no offence. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Tv license question
    ... installed a system for the purpose of receiving tv broadcasts. ... prototype and install a tv broadcast reception ... Did I need a licence to ...
    (uk.legal)
  • MS Security Patch - Is It Bogus?
    ... receiving the same message. ... MS Outlook and MS Outlook Express as ... Recommendation Customers should install the patch at the ... Microsoft products, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • RE: Microsoft Vulnerablities Scan
    ... 4- I have been receiving these 2 issues as warnings for quite some time now. ... "nass" wrote: ... 2- What version of Office you have install now on this machine?. ... I went onto HijackThis and ran a scan. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • Re: TV tuners and Linux in UK
    ... licence for a video recorder even if you only have a B&W TV. ... installing a TV receiver for the purpose of receiving broadcast TV, ... using a TV receiver for the purpose of receiving broadcast TV. ...
    (uk.comp.os.linux)