I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?

--
Big Al - The Peoples Pal
http://www.berkswelldirect.com/index.html
Gowns for Gorgeous Women

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, "big al - Peoples Pal"
wrote:

I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?

I have thought about it, but don't they use the card slot on the old
boxes? We have two freeview boxes but neither has slots.

Also the range of channels is hardly stupendous for 7 quid a month.

EricP wrote:

I have thought about it, but don't they use the card slot on the old
boxes? We have two freeview boxes but neither has slots.

There are some other boxes that will cope as well. The recent software
update for the original pace DTVA (the half moon shaped box) enables its
cam slot on the bottom of the machine. The netgem (and BT badged version
of same) also have a slot, as do a couple of others.

Also the range of channels is hardly stupendous for 7 quid a month.

That is true... no wonder they call it Tits Up Tv...

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:42:49 UTC, EricP wrote:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, "big al - Peoples Pal"
wrote:

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?

Possibly..!

I have thought about it, but don't they use the card slot on the old
boxes? We have two freeview boxes but neither has slots.

Thre are apparently new boxes with slots. So there's another 'one off'
expense.

Also the range of channels is hardly stupendous for 7 quid a month.

Well, 8 quid really. But that won't include Television X! Will that
disappoint you? :-)


--
The information contained in this post
is copyright (C) RD Eager, 2004, and
may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diyprojects.info, who are
FORBIDDEN from copying it.

"EricP" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, "big al - Peoples Pal"
wrote:

I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it
up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered
that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a
card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?

I have thought about it, but don't they use the card slot on the old
boxes? We have two freeview boxes but neither has slots.

Also the range of channels is hardly stupendous for 7 quid a month.


try the ng:

uk.tech.digital-tv

They love arguing about TOTV, digital boxes etc.


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote in message
...
I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered
that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a
card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?


Disc' H&L is now crap, they seem to have dumped all the decent, intelligent
programmes and just repeat the dross that has already been broadcast on the
terrestrial channels and even if it is a 'new' programme they have the same
content / presenters as the other dross.

And they say TV isn't dumbing own... :~(

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:42:55 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

EricP wrote:

I have thought about it, but don't they use the card slot on the old
boxes? We have two freeview boxes but neither has slots.

There are some other boxes that will cope as well. The recent software
update for the original pace DTVA (the half moon shaped box) enables its
cam slot on the bottom of the machine. The netgem (and BT badged version
of same) also have a slot, as do a couple of others.


I think the cam slot may be disabled in the cheaper BT version ......

There is a new box which supports tutv from thomson

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote
| Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box
| with a card slot - only one available so far) and the only
| programme I'd pay for is going to be available.
| Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now
| contemplating going over to freeview + topup channels?

Bear in mind that
(a) the channels are not broadcast 24 hours a day - you only get a few hours
a day of each channel
(b) the times you get each channel, and the channels themselves, are not
guaranteed to be present for the lifetime of your subscription. As top-up-tv
only have a few slots on the multiplexes, there is a higher risk that they
will discontinue some channels to make room for others.

Owain

":::Jerry::::" wrote in message
...

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote in message
...
snip
Disc' H&L is now crap, they seem to have dumped all the decent,
intelligent
programmes and just repeat the dross that has already been broadcast on
the
terrestrial channels and even if it is a 'new' programme they have the
same
content / presenters as the other dross.

And they say TV isn't dumbing own... :~(


Have to say I haven't watched it for about 3 years. I liked "This old
house" and there were a few good RTE (Irish TV) progs on building. Got the
impression there were probably far to many repeats, but they are excuses for
going and actually doing some DIY.

--
Big Al - The Peoples Pal
http://www.berkswelldirect.com/index.html
Gowns for Gorgeous Women

On 21 Oct 2004 06:52:33 GMT, "Bob Eager" wrote:

Also the range of channels is hardly stupendous for 7 quid a month.

Well, 8 quid really. But that won't include Television X! Will that
disappoint you? :-)

No, it would have just made a change from the usual lolly sticks and
gaffer tape!

Chris wrote:


I think the cam slot may be disabled in the cheaper BT version ......

Perhaps, not looked. Having said that you can (or at least could) get
the netgem cheper than the BT version from Makro...


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote in message
...

":::Jerry::::" wrote in message
...

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote in message
...
snip
Disc' H&L is now crap, they seem to have dumped all the decent,
intelligent
programmes and just repeat the dross that has already been broadcast on
the
terrestrial channels and even if it is a 'new' programme they have the
same
content / presenters as the other dross.

And they say TV isn't dumbing own... :~(


Have to say I haven't watched it for about 3 years. I liked "This old
house" and there were a few good RTE (Irish TV) progs on building. Got
the
impression there were probably far to many repeats, but they are excuses
for
going and actually doing some DIY.


The RTE programme seems to have sunk without trace, 'This old house' seems
to have taken a rest (time will tell if it returns in the Winter schedules)
not to mention that programme called 'Home time' also seems to have sunk
without trace. The stable diet seems to now nothing but repeats of Ch4
programmes, fishing or when a DIY slot is shown it's that idiot Tommy Walsh
and his mates.

The only programme that still seems to be shown is 'The Old Yankee
Workshop', but even they seem to be repeats of repeats ! :~(

":::Jerry::::" wrote in message
...

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote in message
...

":::Jerry::::" wrote in message
...

"big al - Peoples Pal" wrote in message
...
snip
Disc' H&L is now crap, they seem to have dumped all the decent,
intelligent
programmes and just repeat the dross that has already been broadcast on
the
terrestrial channels and even if it is a 'new' programme they have the
same
content / presenters as the other dross.

And they say TV isn't dumbing own... :~(


Have to say I haven't watched it for about 3 years. I liked "This old
house" and there were a few good RTE (Irish TV) progs on building. Got
the
impression there were probably far to many repeats, but they are excuses
for
going and actually doing some DIY.


The RTE programme seems to have sunk without trace, 'This old house' seems
to have taken a rest (time will tell if it returns in the Winter
schedules)
not to mention that programme called 'Home time' also seems to have sunk
without trace. The stable diet seems to now nothing but repeats of Ch4
programmes, fishing or when a DIY slot is shown it's that idiot Tommy
Walsh
and his mates.

The only programme that still seems to be shown is 'The Old Yankee
Workshop', but even they seem to be repeats of repeats ! :~(

The Salvager is pretty good

In message , big al - Peoples Pal
writes
I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?

Well I have an NTL set top box in the living room and a bog standard set
top box in the office.

I'm considering getting shot of NTL as Sky one is about all I can get
with NTL which I can't get with the freeview box.

I was thinking of getting a Humax PVR-8000T

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/article/ds15869.html

anybody got any comments?


The information contained in this post
may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diyprojects.info


--
geoff

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, big al - Peoples Pal wrote:

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any
more millions for one the use of only one channel, ...

Do you need a sub for D H&L? or is it one of the Free To Air or View
channels? If it is FTA or V(*), keep an eye open for the Sky no sub
deal that was announced back in June. This should get you a digibox,
card (for the FTV channels, ITV1, Ch4 and five), wok and installation
for a one off payment of =A3150.

Or there seem to be plenty of boxes and cards available on e-bay...

(*)Even if it's FTV the card for ITV1 etc FTV may not work for it.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

Bob Eager wrote:

Well, 8 quid really. But that won't include Television X! Will that
disappoint you? :-)


Thats for a different type of diy !

John Rumm wrote:
EricP wrote:

I have thought about it, but don't they use the card slot on the old
boxes? We have two freeview boxes but neither has slots.


There are some other boxes that will cope as well. The recent software
update for the original pace DTVA (the half moon shaped box) enables its
cam slot on the bottom of the machine. The netgem (and BT badged version
of same) also have a slot, as do a couple of others.


just becasue a freeview box has a cam slot doesn't mean that it's got
the firmware capability to use the top up tv cam. If the manufacture of
the box was to develop the firmware then it should work... But as far
as I've experianced only a few manufactures are actively releasing
firmware updates.

Of course there's the new sky freesat package, something like a £150 one
off payment to the murdock family :-( But is Discovery H&L included?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/click/rss/1...io/3762910.stm


--
--
Peter D

The information contained in this post may not be published
in, or used by http://www.diyprojects.info

Peter D wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

There are some other boxes that will cope as well. The recent software
update for the original pace DTVA (the half moon shaped box) enables
its cam slot on the bottom of the machine. The netgem (and BT badged
version of same) also have a slot, as do a couple of others.

just becasue a freeview box has a cam slot doesn't mean that it's got
the firmware capability to use the top up tv cam. If the manufacture of

True, but that was why I limited my recomendation to box that *do* have
the required firmware support.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, "big al - Peoples Pal"
wrote:

I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?


Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be viewed on-line,
so chuck out the TV.

Rick

"Rick Dipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, "big al - Peoples Pal"
wrote:

I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it
up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered
that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a
card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?


Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be viewed on-line,
so chuck out the TV.

.....and get a 2gig connection.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:19:24 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Rick Dipper" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:20:54 +0100, "big al - Peoples Pal"
wrote:

I used to have Cable TV and my favourite programmes was nearly always
Discovery Home & Leisure, then I moved to t'country and had to give it
up.

I could have got sky, but I hate the thought of giving Rupert any more
millions for one the use of only one channel, I've now just discovered
that
Top-up channels are now available/launching (via a Freeview box with a
card
slot - only one available so far) and the only programme I'd pay for is
going to be available.

Is anyone else a really sad case like me, and are you now contemplating
going over to freeview + topup channels?


Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be viewed on-line,
so chuck out the TV.

....and get a 2gig connection.


Still cheeper than a TV licence, we have a 310 Gig connection at work
:-)

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:39:44 UTC, Rick Dipper
wrote:

Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be viewed on-line,
so chuck out the TV.
....and get a 2gig connection.

Still cheeper than a TV licence, we have a 310 Gig connection at work

But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(

--
The information contained in this post
is copyright (C) RD Eager, 2004, and
may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diyprojects.info, who are
FORBIDDEN from copying it.

"Bob Eager" wrote
| Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be
| viewed on-line, so chuck out the TV.
| ....and get a 2gig connection.
| Still cheeper than a TV licence, we have a 310 Gig
| connection at work
| But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(

No, because streaming video over a computer network isn't broadcast
television.

Owain

--

The following notice was applied to a post which is included in the quoted
text above:

The information contained in this post
is copyright (C) RD Eager, 2004, and
may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diyprojects.info, who are
FORBIDDEN from copying it.

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:16:00 +0100, "Owain"
wrote:

"Bob Eager" wrote
| Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be
| viewed on-line, so chuck out the TV.
| ....and get a 2gig connection.
| Still cheeper than a TV licence, we have a 310 Gig
| connection at work
| But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(

No, because streaming video over a computer network isn't broadcast
television.

Owain

If you are a company and use broadcast TV and distribute it over a
computer network to your employees, you may require a license or
redistribution agreement from the content owner or the original
broadcaster..


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:41:15 +0000, Huge wrote:

"Owain" writes:
"Bob Eager" wrote
| Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be
| viewed on-line, so chuck out the TV.
| ....and get a 2gig connection.
| Still cheeper than a TV licence, we have a 310 Gig
| connection at work
| But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(

No, because streaming video over a computer network isn't broadcast
television.

Let me know what the magistrate thinks, will you?

I'm fairly sure Owain is right. AIUI the licence is for equipment capable
of receiving TV broadcasts.
This means a telly with the tuner removed so you can only watch videos
does not require a licence.
This means a VCR which is used record programs even they are watched
elsewhere or on a B&W TV does.
IANAL but downloading data is not broadcasting.


--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html

"Andy Hall" wrote
| "Owain" wrote:
| | But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(
| No, because streaming video over a computer network isn't
| broadcast television.
| If you are a company and use broadcast TV and distribute it
| over a computer network to your employees, you may require
| a license or redistribution agreement from the content owner
| or the original broadcaster..

I think you would require both - a TV licence for operating the broadcast
receiver, and some form of redistribution rights.

Owain

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:07:50 +0100, "Ed Sirett"
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:41:15 +0000, Huge wrote:

"Owain" writes:
"Bob Eager" wrote
| Home and Lesiure advertise that their programs can be
| viewed on-line, so chuck out the TV.
| ....and get a 2gig connection.
| Still cheeper than a TV licence, we have a 310 Gig
| connection at work
| But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(

No, because streaming video over a computer network isn't broadcast
television.

Let me know what the magistrate thinks, will you?

I'm fairly sure Owain is right. AIUI the licence is for equipment capable
of receiving TV broadcasts.
This means a telly with the tuner removed so you can only watch videos
does not require a licence.
This means a VCR which is used record programs even they are watched
elsewhere or on a B&W TV does.
IANAL but downloading data is not broadcasting.

It depends on use and on the content owner.

For off air TV used in a domestic setting you are right - basically it
depends on the presence of a tuner.

For example, when my daughter was at university, she had a tuner card
in her PC to watch TV programs without needing a separate TV. This
definitely needed a license.

If you watch streaming video at home from an internet site, you don't
need a license.

However, the game changes totally in a commercial environment. You
can't just fix up a TV tuner, satellite receiver or cable STB and
stream the programs over your corporate network without a license.

A lot of content is licensed for domestic use only, where the owner
can be assured of a reasonably know revenue stream. In a commercial
environment a standard TV license is required for each location of the
business, plus any requirements that satellite TV companies may have
on top of that.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Andy Hall wrote:

If you watch streaming video at home from an internet site, you don't
need a license.

Oh yes you do, since 1st April this year. The TV licence is no longer a
wireless telegraphy licence under the 1949 WT Act. It's now required by
regulations under the 2003 Communications Act:
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20040692.htm.

There was a long thread on this topic on cam.misc in July - see, for
example:
http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=4...ws .zen.co.uk.

--
Andy

"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
Andy Hall wrote:

If you watch streaming video at home from an internet site, you don't
need a license.

Oh yes you do, since 1st April this year. The TV licence is no longer a
wireless telegraphy licence under the 1949 WT Act. It's now required by
regulations under the 2003 Communications Act:
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20040692.htm.

There was a long thread on this topic on cam.misc in July - see, for
example:snip URL

Would you care to quote the relevant section or sub section were the above
is stated in the document quoted, please....

ISTM that people are getting confused about computers fitted with RF or
Satellite receiving cards and those just connected to the 'internet', in the
Act what is and is not a "television set" is clearly set out. To quote the
relevant section;

quote
Meaning of "television set"
11. - (1) In Part 1 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967, "television
set" means any apparatus which (either alone or in association with
other apparatus) is capable of receiving (whether by means of
wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service
but is not computer apparatus.

(2) In this regulation, "computer apparatus" means apparatus which -

(a) is designed or adapted to be used (either alone or in
association with other apparatus) for storing or processing
data, but not for doing so in connection with the reception
by means of wireless telegraphy of television programme
services; and

(b) is not offered for sale or letting as apparatus for use (either
alone or in association with other apparatus) primarily for or in
connection with the reception (whether by means of wireless
telegraphy or otherwise) of such services;

and "processing" includes displaying.
/quote

Also, to back this up, no mention is made on any of the BBCi 'watch again' /
'watch live' pages (such as the web-streamed news or Parliament options)
that a valid TV licence is needed to access the content in the UK and
display it on a computer monitor (or other monitor device). Now, I suppose,
this little fact might just be an omission by the BBC...

ISTM that the loop-hole that was closed was that of computers installed with
'PCI tuner cards' etc. Once fitted they come under section 11 - (1) above
but not unless so fitted.

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:21:27 +0100, Andy Wade
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:

If you watch streaming video at home from an internet site, you don't
need a license.

Oh yes you do, since 1st April this year. The TV licence is no longer a
wireless telegraphy licence under the 1949 WT Act. It's now required by
regulations under the 2003 Communications Act:
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...4/20040692.htm.


There was a long thread on this topic on cam.misc in July - see, for
example:
http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=4...ws .zen.co.uk.

There certainly was :-)

I think that you may be extrapolating more out of this than is in the
TV Licensing SI.

It has to be defined as a television program service within the
definitions given in the Communications Act.


"television programme service" means any of the following-
(a) a television broadcasting service;
(b) a television licensable content service;
(c) a digital television programme service;
(d) a restricted television service;

So unless the content that you watch falls under one of these
definitions, licensing would appear not to apply.

If you look at the Ofcom notes on Television Licensable Content
Services, they do not intend it to apply to internet streaming or
video on demand.

You can also get a reasonable idea of the situation from the BBC web
site. As far as I can find, the only thing that is live streamed is
the Parliament channel. The rest is clips of various lengths.
In fact they go out of their way to make sure that content is readily
available all over the planet by being their own ASP.

Obviously if you install a TV tuner and set up a streaming video
server and watch that on your PC, then you have created a licensable
TV, but this is not the same thing.

I may have missed something, but I can't find anything that says or
implies that TV licensing applies to content from public internet
sites where the content provider is not asking for payment and
controlling access.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
snip

[ re streamed (ex) television media ]

I may have missed something, but I can't find anything that says or
implies that TV licensing applies to content from public internet
sites where the content provider is not asking for payment and
controlling access.


I don't think you really meant exactly what you said above, did you,
otherwise such content on (say) AOL would require a TV licence and they seek
payment to access their servers etc. and most certainly do control access to
their networks and what content they carry !...

:::Jerry:::: wrote:

Would you care to quote the relevant section or sub section were the above
is stated in the document quoted, please....

This bit:
quote
Meaning of "television receiver"
9. - (1) In Part 4 of the Act (licensing of TV reception),
"television receiver" means any apparatus installed or used for the
purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or
otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is
installed or used for any other purpose.
/quote
BUT see Andy Hall's post re the meaning of "television service".

ISTM that people are getting confused about computers fitted with RF or
Satellite receiving cards and those just connected to the 'internet', in the
Act what is and is not a "television set" is clearly set out. To quote the
relevant section;
snip

A "television set" is defined for the purpose of the '67 WT act, wrt
dealer notification. It is not the same as a "television receiver".

--
Andy

Andy Hall wrote:

I think that you may be extrapolating more out of this than is in the
TV Licensing SI.

It has to be defined as a television program service within the
definitions given in the Communications Act.

Yes, that was the bit I didn't get round to looking up. No-one else in
the cam.misc thread took up the challenge either.

"television programme service" means any of the following-
(a) a television broadcasting service;
(b) a television licensable content service;
(c) a digital television programme service;
(d) a restricted television service;

So unless the content that you watch falls under one of these
definitions, licensing would appear not to apply.

If you look at the Ofcom notes on Television Licensable Content
Services, they do not intend it to apply to internet streaming or
video on demand.

snip

I may have missed something, but I can't find anything that says or
implies that TV licensing applies to content from public internet
sites where the content provider is not asking for payment and
controlling access.

Well now I'm confused. If the Beeb were to start streaming (say) BBC1
I'm sure they'd want it covered by the licence requirement[*]. But how
does that differ from the Parliament channel? Both are (broadcast)
television programme services.
[*] Otherwise, why would the legislation heave been put in place?

--
Andy

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:21:14 +0100, Andy Wade
wrote:



Well now I'm confused. If the Beeb were to start streaming (say) BBC1
I'm sure they'd want it covered by the licence requirement[*]. But how
does that differ from the Parliament channel? Both are (broadcast)
television programme services.

[*] Otherwise, why would the legislation heave been put in place?

Perhaps this is why they don't.

Most of it seems to be to cover the distribution to the viewer of
"broadcast" TV via satellite, cable and DTTV, which were not very well
covered by the earlier legislation.

The fact that IP as a technology might be used to distribute the
content is a red herring because the networks used are private.

BBC programs can be seen accidentally outside the UK in Belgium and
parts of Holland via analogue transmission, but this does not account
for many people.

Most of the satellites with footprints over Europe carry BBC content
(typically BBC World and BBC Prime) encrypted and presumably with
payment back. There is the odd transponder with these in free-to-air
The radio World Service receives government funding from the Foreign
Office IIRC.

You can also get to BBC World TV on the internet but that has
detection for UK origin IP addresses and denies access because the
content is not "meant" to be for the UK audience.
However, if you access via a proxy outside the UK, you can get access
but it comes through Real Networks Superpass system for which you
ultimately pay. Undoubtedly the BBC gets payment for that

BBC Parliament seems to be an odd one out in that it can be accessed
in full and live on the internet with no restriction. Perhaps the
legislators decided wisely that it would be a hot potato to make an
issue of it.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

Would you care to quote the relevant section or sub section were the
above
is stated in the document quoted, please....

This bit:
quote
Meaning of "television receiver"
9. - (1) In Part 4 of the Act (licensing of TV reception),
"television receiver" means any apparatus installed or used for the
purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or
otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is
installed or used for any other purpose.
/quote
BUT see Andy Hall's post re the meaning of "television service".

ISTM that people are getting confused about computers fitted with RF or
Satellite receiving cards and those just connected to the 'internet', in
the
Act what is and is not a "television set" is clearly set out. To quote
the
relevant section;
snip

A "television set" is defined for the purpose of the '67 WT act, wrt
dealer notification. It is not the same as a "television receiver".


So you think that EVERYONE who has a computer needs a TV license, as any
computer is capable of being used to view 'television programme' content via
an IP network...

ISTM that you need to get a clue.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:21:14 +0100, Andy Wade
wrote:



Well now I'm confused. If the Beeb were to start streaming (say) BBC1
I'm sure they'd want it covered by the licence requirement[*]. But how
does that differ from the Parliament channel? Both are (broadcast)
television programme services.

[*] Otherwise, why would the legislation heave been put in place?

Perhaps this is why they don't.

Most of it seems to be to cover the distribution to the viewer of
"broadcast" TV via satellite, cable and DTTV, which were not very well
covered by the earlier legislation.

The fact that IP as a technology might be used to distribute the
content is a red herring because the networks used are private.

BBC programs can be seen accidentally outside the UK in Belgium and
parts of Holland via analogue transmission, but this does not account
for many people.

Transmitter 'spill' has nothing to do with UK TV licensing.


Most of the satellites with footprints over Europe carry BBC content
(typically BBC World and BBC Prime) encrypted and presumably with
payment back. There is the odd transponder with these in free-to-air
The radio World Service receives government funding from the Foreign
Office IIRC.

The BBC changed satellite (from the one used by Murdock, which has a large
footprint) to one with a restricted footprint, this SAVED the BBC money due
to not having to go through the Murdock encryption process, in either case
AIUI the BBC did not and does not receive any 'payment back' were the
broadcast can be received.


You can also get to BBC World TV on the internet but that has
detection for UK origin IP addresses and denies access because the
content is not "meant" to be for the UK audience.
However, if you access via a proxy outside the UK, you can get access
but it comes through Real Networks Superpass system for which you
ultimately pay. Undoubtedly the BBC gets payment for that

BBC Parliament seems to be an odd one out in that it can be accessed
in full and live on the internet with no restriction. Perhaps the
legislators decided wisely that it would be a hot potato to make an
issue of it.


So you are agreeing that everyone who own a computer needs a TV licence, as
any computer is *capable* of 'receiving broadcast' content via IP ?!...

The real issues regarding access are COPYRIGHT and CONTENT licensing for
most if not all access restrictions, why do you think the BBC listen again
service does not contain all programmes and those that are available are
only listed for 7 days.

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:46:31 +0100, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:21:14 +0100, Andy Wade
wrote:



Well now I'm confused. If the Beeb were to start streaming (say) BBC1
I'm sure they'd want it covered by the licence requirement[*]. But how
does that differ from the Parliament channel? Both are (broadcast)
television programme services.

[*] Otherwise, why would the legislation heave been put in place?

Perhaps this is why they don't.

Most of it seems to be to cover the distribution to the viewer of
"broadcast" TV via satellite, cable and DTTV, which were not very well
covered by the earlier legislation.

The fact that IP as a technology might be used to distribute the
content is a red herring because the networks used are private.

BBC programs can be seen accidentally outside the UK in Belgium and
parts of Holland via analogue transmission, but this does not account
for many people.

Transmitter 'spill' has nothing to do with UK TV licensing.

yes I know.



Most of the satellites with footprints over Europe carry BBC content
(typically BBC World and BBC Prime) encrypted and presumably with
payment back. There is the odd transponder with these in free-to-air
The radio World Service receives government funding from the Foreign
Office IIRC.

The BBC changed satellite (from the one used by Murdock, which has a large
footprint) to one with a restricted footprint, this SAVED the BBC money due
to not having to go through the Murdock encryption process, in either case
AIUI the BBC did not and does not receive any 'payment back' were the
broadcast can be received.

The reason for the change was the transponder leasing figure that
Murdoch had in mind to be on the Sky platform, not so much the cost of
encryption issue.

The point being on the new platform that the footprint mainly covers
areas where TV reception is licensed and they can take a commercial
view on it, only needing to be in the Sky EPG.




You can also get to BBC World TV on the internet but that has
detection for UK origin IP addresses and denies access because the
content is not "meant" to be for the UK audience.
However, if you access via a proxy outside the UK, you can get access
but it comes through Real Networks Superpass system for which you
ultimately pay. Undoubtedly the BBC gets payment for that

BBC Parliament seems to be an odd one out in that it can be accessed
in full and live on the internet with no restriction. Perhaps the
legislators decided wisely that it would be a hot potato to make an
issue of it.


So you are agreeing that everyone who own a computer needs a TV licence, as
any computer is *capable* of 'receiving broadcast' content via IP ?!...

No I didn't say that at all. I had moved on from the licensing
issue in the sense of the TV license that is paid , to the generic
issue of the licensing of content in the general sense - i.e. right to
use. That is separate and distinct from TV Licensing.

I made the point regarding definitions of broadcast TV in the
Communications Act.




The real issues regarding access are COPYRIGHT and CONTENT licensing for
most if not all access restrictions, why do you think the BBC listen again
service does not contain all programmes and those that are available are
only listed for 7 days.


That was precisely the point that I was making, using the BBC internet
content sites as an example.






..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:03:40 +0100, "Owain"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" wrote
| "Owain" wrote:
| | But unfortunately it still needs a licence... :-(
| No, because streaming video over a computer network isn't
| broadcast television.
| If you are a company and use broadcast TV and distribute it
| over a computer network to your employees, you may require
| a license or redistribution agreement from the content owner
| or the original broadcaster..

I think you would require both - a TV licence for operating the broadcast
receiver, and some form of redistribution rights.

Owain



In a commercial setting, yes. I've had some involvement in
implementing such systems in the past. For off-air analogue TV a
business TV license covers it because it covers you building by
building within the business. So I could cable up my office with a
CATV system and have lots of TVs, but I need another license if I
sublet part of the building for the use of others - or rather they do.
Distributing within the building over IP would really make no
difference to that principle.

If you had multiple buildings you could circumvent this with IP
streaming, but it may not be economic - you would be trading the cost
of your building to building bandwidth with implementing an additional
head-end.

However, commercially licensed services are a different matter. IIRC
Sky have a special charging scheme and some of the paid financial TV
services are or were licensed per user.





..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Wade" wrote
| Well now I'm confused. If the Beeb were to start streaming
| (say) BBC1 I'm sure they'd want it covered by the licence
| requirement[*]. But how does that differ from the Parliament
| channel? Both are (broadcast) television programme services.

It might be more accurate to say that Parliament is a video recording (of a
matter of public record) presented on the BBC website, which also happens to
be broadcast on television by the BBC. The Scottish Parliament, for example,
can be watched on streaming video from the SP website, without the BBC being
involved at all.

Owain

":::Jerry::::" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:21:14 +0100, Andy Wade
wrote:



snip


BBC Parliament seems to be an odd one out in that it can be accessed
in full and live on the internet with no restriction. Perhaps the
legislators decided wisely that it would be a hot potato to make an
issue of it.


Many moons ago - ab intio the TV service was
run by the Houses of Parliament themselves. [I needed to
obtain their permission to utilise a picture captured off
screen]. Then suddenly - Year 5 AB?-the service was 'taken over'
by BBC.
The BBC started to run subtitled explanations of what was
occurring on screen - some might say giving the Government's
slant on things under discussion. Of course when the 'House'
decided that BBC would broadcast our parliament - Tone
had appointed his nuLabourContributors to positions
of power in that organisation.

--

Brian