Most active commenters
  • Retr0id(3)

←back to thread

Please do not write below the line

(www.bbctvlicence.com)
313 points dcminter | 29 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | source | bottom
Show context
cooper_ganglia ◴[] No.41907633[source]
A "TV License" is one of those things I alway assumed people were making up to satirize the claims of over-regulation & bureaucracy in the UK.

Finding out it was real was a mixture of hilarious and sobering.

replies(19): >>41907663 #>>41907684 #>>41907721 #>>41907726 #>>41907766 #>>41907792 #>>41907811 #>>41907864 #>>41907881 #>>41907917 #>>41908104 #>>41908142 #>>41908609 #>>41908757 #>>41908807 #>>41909327 #>>41909601 #>>41909804 #>>41911273 #
1. Zak ◴[] No.41907684[source]
Many European countries are worse about it than the UK; even people who do not own a television are required by law to pay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence

replies(9): >>41907763 #>>41907863 #>>41907865 #>>41907867 #>>41907970 #>>41907989 #>>41908308 #>>41909072 #>>41909254 #
2. alvarlagerlof ◴[] No.41907763[source]
In Sweden there was this whole thing where you apparently had to pay even if you only owned a laptop.
replies(1): >>41908209 #
3. praptak ◴[] No.41907863[source]
I remember that in Poland electronic repair shops offered companies removal of the TV demodulator from TV sets used as monitors. That was necessary for the TV not to count as a TV receiver and thus not to generate the fee liability.

I think there also were some large cases where a company who owned a car fleet had to pay for the car radios.

replies(1): >>41910288 #
4. notatoad ◴[] No.41907865[source]
that seems fine to me. whatever they want to call it, if it applies to everybody it's just a tax and they're using tax dollars to fund some TV content and/or infrastrcture. that's all totally normal.

the absurd part is restricting that tax to only people who watch TV, and trying to do surveillance and enforcement to determine whether or not somebody is eligible for a TV tax.

replies(2): >>41908134 #>>41909410 #
5. ho_schi ◴[] No.41907867[source]
This fee is hot topic in Germany. Our French friends also enjoy ARTE[1] but seem not to suffer anymore from this ridiculous fee. Actually I’m surprised that the Swiss fee is even higher, despite everything in the Swiss is expensive.

[1] Big parts of our public television suck. But ARTE is awesome!

    * Borgen
    * Occupied
    * Mit offenen Karten
    * Karambolage
    * …
PS: ARTE is watchable outside of France and Germany in a lot of countries in Europe. Poland, Spain, Austria, Netherlands, Czech and so on.
replies(2): >>41908147 #>>41908514 #
6. codetrotter ◴[] No.41907970[source]
When I was studying at the university, I shared a privately owned house with some other people. We did not have a TV license, but I wanted to buy a big screen TV to use as computer monitor in my room.

I found out that in my country you can have a third-party, approved technician come to your house to disable the tuner portion of your TV so that you would not have to pay any television license. Around this time analog broadcasting was already being phased out or had already completely shut down in my country. And although some kind of digital broadcasting over air-waves exists to replace it, most people do not use that. Instead, you'll typically buy a subscribtion via cable or via IPTV or via sattelite, all of which come with a separate box that plugs into your TV via HDMI instead of relying on the tuner in your TV, even if that tuner can decode digitally broadcast radio signals. So the tuner in the TV was not serving much of a purpose anyway, even if I'd ever want to use the TV as a TV.

I paid a technician a bit of money to come disable the tuner for me in my newly bought 55" LED TV. I was imagining that he'd be opening the TV and carefully removing some essential part. What he actually did was take a plier and break the input for the tuner and then put a small piece of tape over it. Simple solutions, I guess. Then, I think I also got them to write a letter for me confirming that the tuner had been disabled.

It cost me a little bit of money, but not too much. Less than paying the TV license fee for that and subsequent years I was staying in that house anyway.

These days, I still have the TV. I put it in my grandfather's house a few years ago so he could use it. He already pays TV license fee and has a digital receiver. It has HDMI out which goes in to the TV. So he is not inconvenienced by the broken tuner input of the TV either, just like I expected back then that this disabling of the tuner would never be a problem even if I ever wanted to use it as a TV.

It does seem kind of silly now, that I paid someone to come break the input for a portion of the TV that was never going to be needed even if you wanted to use it as a TV. But I still think it was worth it, and that it saved me from worrying about inspections. Even though no inspection ever happened at the house either back in the days where I was using it as a monitor for my computer.

7. Retr0id ◴[] No.41907989[source]
As a UK resident and TV owner (who does not need a license), I wouldn't even mind that much if I was required to pay just for TV ownership. It's the "enforcement" system that's utterly broken (although I have no idea how it compares to other countries).

We have this ridiculous situation where I'm not required to pay (so I don't), yet the TV licensing people are allowed (required?) to send me junk mail week after week trying to trick me into thinking I do need to pay them.

replies(1): >>41908143 #
8. immibis ◴[] No.41908134[source]
Well, first they wanted to tax everyone a bit to pay for the BBC. And then someone said that would let the government easily pressure the BBC by withholding funds. And then someone said let's let the BBC collect it's own tax then. And someone else said that would be illegal to make people pay for the BBC if they aren't actually receiving any services from the BBC. And so here we are. So they wrote in this provision that in practice exempts precisely zero people but everyone tries to chase after anyway, contorting themselves through hoops to make it apply.

"Any services from the BBC" means any. TV broadcast, radio broadcast, or internet streaming. And because the actual intention was to make everyone pay, the law is written so you have to pay if you could receive one. If you have a computer and the Internet, you could receive internet streaming.

And then you have more stupid rules, like even though they're collecting a tax, they're not tax collectors so they don't have any authority to come into your house, so they invent weird ways to detect if you have a TV or not.

Presumably a left wing government would remove all this stuff and just make it a tax.

replies(2): >>41908251 #>>41908274 #
9. DrillShopper ◴[] No.41908143[source]
What is the reason that you don't have to pay?
replies(1): >>41908204 #
10. metabagel ◴[] No.41908147[source]
Occupied is outstanding, and available in the U.S. on Netflix.
replies(2): >>41908398 #>>41912207 #
11. Retr0id ◴[] No.41908204{3}[source]
I don't watch broadcast TV or other such TV-license-related services. My TV is a glorified computer monitor slash media player.
12. eastbound ◴[] No.41908209[source]
In France you pay the copyright infringement tax on every hard drive / SSD / storage you purchase. But it’s still forbidden to pirate movies.
replies(2): >>41908719 #>>41911110 #
13. Retr0id ◴[] No.41908251{3}[source]
This isn't accurate, that's just what they want people to think. In practice it exempts most people below the age of about 30, most of whom do not consume any media within the scope of the TV license.

> the law is written so you have to pay if you could receive one.

That's not true. You're allowed to own equipment capable of receiving licensed broadcasts, all that matters is that you don't.

14. wizzwizz4 ◴[] No.41908274{3}[source]
> the law is written so you have to pay if you could receive one. If you have a computer and the Internet, you could receive internet streaming.

That's not true, according to https://www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence.

> You do not need a TV Licence to watch:

> • streaming services like Netflix and Disney Plus

> • on-demand TV through services like All 4 and Amazon Prime Video

> • videos on websites like YouTube

> • videos or DVDs

15. preisschild ◴[] No.41908308[source]
Yeah, Austria had the british system for a while, but after everyone started streaming (because the content is better and prices are actually cheaper) they changed it so every household needs to pay.

Now I'm forced to pay for old sitcoms, astrology shows, soccer stuff and other useless things I don't watch anyways...

16. FragenAntworten ◴[] No.41908398{3}[source]
I didn't find it on Netflix, but it seems to be available on Amazon Prime Video.
17. 9dev ◴[] No.41908514[source]
While the public television may suck, it still pays for the only real Independent news coverage in Germany. No matter what you think of the ARD or ZDF and their management boards, the work of the Deutschlandfunk and regional broadcasters is outstanding and a pillar of a free democracy.

I hate having to pay for distribution licenses for soccer games, but if that ensures continued support for high-quality journalism, so be it.

replies(1): >>41908621 #
18. sva_ ◴[] No.41908621{3}[source]
> I hate having to pay for distribution licenses for soccer games, but if that ensures continued support for high-quality journalism, so be it.

You sound like you're in an abusive relationship. Get help while you still can.

19. AshamedCaptain ◴[] No.41908719{3}[source]
It is not "copyright infringement" tax. It's called a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy and it's a rather common thing, at least in all of Europe.
replies(2): >>41909727 #>>41911247 #
20. TheRealPomax ◴[] No.41909072[source]
So, basically "how tax works"? You pay into a common good, whether you use it or not.
21. throwawayffffas ◴[] No.41909254[source]
The absurdity in the UK is that it's a License fee and that there is this whole absurd enforcement system. In other countries it's a tax if you don't pay it, you are essentially not paying your taxes. I am OK with a universal tax for a universal service even if I don't use that service. What I am not okay with is fraudulent threatening letters, weirdos creeping in the bushes trying to see if I am watching TV and goons showing up at my front door to collect what they think I owe them.
replies(1): >>41909454 #
22. frankus ◴[] No.41909410[source]
The whole scheme seems like something an American would come up with: paying for public services with regressive user fees instead of broad-based progressive taxation.

But it's unheard of (for media[1]) in the US and common in Europe.

[1]The closest thing we have here might be parking passes for state parks, even unpopular ones where free parking would remain mostly empty.

23. seoulmetro ◴[] No.41909454[source]
Had a white van with huge antennas parked out front for a few days when they were refusing to believe that a large share house of young people didn't watch TV. This was in 2015. We didn't own a TV nor watch.

The van soon left after a few days but left a full bottle of yellow liquid. Makes a fun story, but yeah they threaten you a bunch and it's quite sad.

replies(1): >>41910369 #
24. crazygringo ◴[] No.41909727{4}[source]
Seems close enough. The article even discusses how it is "often considered a compensation for illegal file sharing". And even if it's common, that doesn't make it any less unfair. (Indeed, the longest section of the article is titled "Questions on fairness".)
25. Scoundreller ◴[] No.41910288[source]
Finland requires a radio license fee for taxis, or at least did 21 years ago:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/dec/07/andrewosborn

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2542291.stm

26. marcus_holmes ◴[] No.41910369{3}[source]
I lived on the Isle of Man for a few years back in the 90's. The white van would be spotted on the ferry coming over and a small notice in the paper would appear. Everyone hid their TVs for a couple of weeks, until the paper said the van was back on the ferry.

It sounds so farcical now, in our age of ubiquitous surveillance capitalism.

27. __turbobrew__ ◴[] No.41911110{3}[source]
* Slaps 22TiB SMR drive * This baby can fit so many Linux ISOs on it.
28. mr_toad ◴[] No.41911247{4}[source]
I read that as “Pirate” copying levy. Took a few takes to read it as “Private”.
29. ho_schi ◴[] No.41912207{3}[source]
Yes. Netflix seems to “import” public television series from Europe into their paid subscription.