In article ,
"altheim" writes:

"Andrew Gabriel" wrote:
"altheim" writes:

OK, Here it is:

"No person shall establish or use any station for wireless telegraphy
or instal or use any apparatus for wireless telegraphy except under
the authority of a licence in that behalf granted by the Postmaster
General, and any person who establishes or uses any station for
wireless telegraphy or instals or uses any apparatus for wireless
telegraphy except under and in accordance with such a licence
shall be guilty of an offence under this Act."

Except for specifying "in use" __as well__ as "establish" and
"install" how is Mr Kraftee wrong?

You missed the key bit "for wireless telegraphy"

If I install and use a VCR recorder only for playing prerecorded
videos, then it wasn't installed or used for wireless telegraphy,
and thus no licence is required. This is well established law.

If you owned a video cassette player - as opposed to a video
cassette recorder - I might agree with you, but if your VCR
is capable of receiving broadcast material then you become
liable. That is clearly stated in the very paragraph which you
referred us to so I fail to see why you think your case is
supported by 'established law'.

I've sat through around 30 cases in magistrates court, and heard
it stated there many times. A defence solicitor will (where
possible and relevant) show that the apparatus was not "installed
or used for wireless telegraphy", but installed and used for some
other purpose, and thus does not come under the Act.
Try reading the above again -- I can only assume you aren't
reading it carefully enough, as that is exactly what it says.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]