-UK News- BBC Licence fee 'to fund superfast broadband' roll-out

But you would be if they do this, you would be getting the extra speed free which would usually cost many more bucks

I dont care what bill I pay that they use for faster broadband, if I am already paying it, and they want to use it to make things faster, why the hell not, its free

 

Well whoever "they" were, are wrong.

"You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder.

It costs £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for a black and white TV Licence."

Watching TV on the internet

You need to be covered by a licence if you watch TV online at the same time as it's being broadcast on conventional TV in the UK or the Channel Islands.

Video recorders and digital recorders like Sky+

You need a licence if you record TV as it's broadcast, whether that's on a conventional video recorder or digital box.

These are direct quotes from TV licensing.

So to clear it up once more, you only need a TV license if you are watching TV as it is being broadcasted. Computers only come under this if they are linked to that broadcast, or have a TV card. If it isn't, then it doesnt need one.

You don't need a TV license to watch Iplayer because it isn't being broadcast. It is a database of pre-recorded content on demand.

Anyone who is paying a license fee and are outside these guidlines are simply mugs, and you're being taken for a ride.

 

so you are telling me a tv detector van and the people who were with it are lieing ?

 

Its not just a TV detector van it detects weather you are using "ANY" kind of equipement at your address that is capable of recieving ie tv's,mobile,pc,laptops,consoles connected to the internet,etc etc etc the list goes on they then check weather your address has a valid licence & if you dont they pay you a visit.
I was wrong with earlier posts its a seperate licence for broadcasting.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology-top8/

 

Well they obviously are.

The TV license website clearly states, just as i clearly stated, the terms on which you need to purchase a license.

 

I'm not sure about this BBC funded broadand thing, just last year they were speaking of a 2mbit minimum... which is mediocre at best.

It will be the same as usual though, lots of money will get diverted from the BBC, barely any of it will be spent on broadband... and we'll still have cutting edge ADSL...

 

it will make it way into mp's pockets again :bang:

 

They are awfully ruthless though. They lie knowingly through their teeth.
When I first came to university, they were peddling propaganda in halls that anyone with a laptop needed to get a TV license... they weren't even specifying 'if you use it to watch TV'.

I've paid the license fee once, because I was sharing a house with people who wanted to watch the drivel that is broadcast the old fashioned way, but I certainly won't be once I have my own place.

The BBC wastes most of the money, and the money it does spend on programming is on stupid crap that doesn't even rate well.
The market is strong enough now, in my opinion, that we really don't need the BBC anymore, not for TV anyway. The news website and radio are still slightly less pathetic, but I imagine they'll be eclipsed by better offerings within the next 5 years or so.

tl;dr - the license fee and BBC are stupid.

 

Source

 

It is all just petty threats, if they come to your door tell them to piss off.

Anyway all you do is write a letter giving you reasons for not wanting to be harassed by either person or letter and restricting outright access to your property.

Not had any bother for years now. Problem solved.

And frankly the whole TV licence thing is ridiculous and outdated. Now that everything is changing to digital there is no excuse, the only ones that pay should be the ones that watch BBC and those that don't pay don't get a digital card like SKY and no tv. Simple and problem solved... but no they would lose too much revenue from mugs that pay up in fear even though they don't watch the crap.. lol.

 

He won't get faster broadband, he'll get access to it if he lives in a rural area.
you can already get high speed broadband in cities and large towns.

 

And how is that a bad thing? That people in rural areas get a chance to buy faster broadband.

 

I would love high speed broadband in my area..........

 

but only the few will gain from this , i can already get upto 50mb/s in my area . so i have to pay towards others getting it also , what is this country coming to

 

I hate to say it but that is a pretty pathetic and selfish comment. So you're fine if only the roads you use are good, or only the hopitals local to you are up to standard? And yes, internet access now is up to that level of importance.

We should have a broadband minister because we are an island nation without any industry and only 'white collar' jobs. Tech, research, finance etc. are now all highly dependent on a global network and it is important for government to protect and enhance any such system. Forget about computer gaming, piracy and videos of anthropromorphic cats and understand what the internet now truly is. A strong broadband infrastructure everywhere in the UK is vital, and the more people that have fast internet access the stronger the content will be, sparking investment in communications and jobs as well as giving opportunites to people regardless of their location.

"What is this country coming to" - seriously? This is what you're complaining about?

 

why dont British telecom pay for it? seriously its their lines and their exchanges

 

sorry but have you seen the state of the roads around the notts area of the uk ? , the pot holes are at least 3-4inch deep on the small ones . this country is getting greedy and they do little for the money they get . look at he mp's and banker's

 

I thought the MP's just cut their salaries
And still, that doesn't make your comment not selfish.

 

LOL yeah by like 5% which isnt really anything

 

Right, I fear you may be missing the point of the simile. That said, roads are obviously vital and it is only when problems occur, like potholes, do you recognise their daily importance and turn to the government to fix them. Similarily, when our communications needs are not nationally met or are being restricted through commercial-only enterprises, we again turn to the government to fix problems. Hence the need for a broadband mp to advocate and promote the roll out of nation wide fibre optics for home, work and security advancements.

On a side note, MP's are still only paid £60-80K, with £80-100k if you're in the cabinet. Considering these people are running the country, this is chicken feed when they could be in the private sector earning 5 times as much + bonuses. All public sector workers should be well paid if they are good at their jobs or else they will leave for more lucrative opportunites and we end up with second best people in positions of authority.

As for bankers I pray to God you realise they are the only thing keeping our economy afloat at the moment. All this naivety about putting high taxes on them or capping bonuses. Yes, some of the bonuses are very high for a limited number of people, but these are people who have 100's of millions of pounds running across their desks daily and are recompensed as such. If you start taxing them as some sort of vengence or quick fix solution, then you don't understand the liquidity of the financial sector. If investment banks costs are too high in one area then they just up sticks and move to another; they are not bound to one location. Chase them away and they won't be paying taxes or spending their bonuses within our borders.

And this country isn't getting greedy, it has been debt ridden since the second world war, compounded with easy credit of the 90's and the last decade to a level where we have debt per GDP levels akin to Greece, and see what they are going through. Want to know why we pay taxes - there's a good example.