Tv Licence Loophole ? What Is Live Tv.

[modeller]

On th news today they were interviewing a man who claimed he didn't need to pay his TV licence as ; I quote " I never watch anything live ! I only watch things like i player or are on the Internet which have been recorded
elsewhere. I personally never record anything. " Therefore at no time did he watch anything 'live ' as specified on the TV licence.

No one from the TV Licencing Authority was prepared to be interviewed so
there was no further discussion, but it occurred to me how much of our programmes are truly live. maybe the odd sporting event , or the odd 'live '
interview but I'm told even that has a 10 second delay so that anything obcene can be bleeped out. Films, documentaries , shows of all sorts, all the repeats etc. None are live.
This only leaves a few spectacles , fireworks, carnivals, jubilie , royal events etc, that can be called live , and then they in turn are repeated.

Has the interviewee got a case ?

[bazwillrun]

"would result in the loss of many (possibly most) independent channels"

having seen a lot of them over the years, thats hardly a loss, if that were the case.
Theres all sorts of scenarios been bandied about, but all just speculation to suit whoevers corner.

Like anything, if needs must then ways are found.

[deggers316]

this man on radio today really annoyed me, he wont pay a licence fee because he only watches catch up tv ,how does he thinks all the progs are made, with who's money ? ie: the BBC's fabulous nature /wildlife docs amongst other progs

[Buenchico]

The licence fee also funds 57 national, regional and local radio stations
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/stations
and the excellent BBC website.

It's worth it for Radio 4 alone!

[ichkeria]

There are "professional" licence dodgers who make a great fuss either about the fact that they watch TV but don't need a licence or

[ichkeria]

...or that they are persecuted by the Licence Collection Police. I sometimes think such people would be better off with a life, never mind a licence.
The chap quoted as the start almost certainly doesn't need a licence. But I'm not sure why all the attendant fuss about it.

[factor-fiction]

The case does show thought that the rules are are a little silly now. It does seem wrong that a licence (to fund the BBC) is needed to watch TV as it's broadcast but not if you listen to live radio broadcasts and watch all the TV programmes on catch-up a day later.

[ichkeria]

Yes I agree. I suppose the thinking is that you are accessing material pre-recorded by someone else in the same way as one can presumably watch recorded DVDs or tapes on a TV without a licence. But you're still benefitting from BBC programming, whereas someone who watches non-BBC channels only on their TV (tho' I refuse to believe there is anyone who actually does that) WOULD need a licence.
And as I said before, I wonder how it's enforced. I still maintain that the licence fee is very important, but I'm sure the parameters for enforcement/collection will have to change in time as it's lagging more and more behind the technology of broadcasting.