Data Protection and TV Licenses

[Gordy]

Have you ever thought that your attitude towards this is causing others to pay more? Same goes with piracy, insurance and many other things that people don't pay for/steal/whatever...

If everyone paid their licence's do you think it would be as expensive? If everyone paid their insurance do you think it would be as expensive? If everyone paid for DVD's/games/music do you think they would be as expensive?

Why don't you all pay it and watch TV legally?

I will be paying but I'm skint at the mo so its had to wait

[5lab]

gordy that was just from tv-l.org or something (the tv licencing home page)

you DO need a licence if you just wanna watch dvds, IF you use a tv with tuning capabilities.

there IS equipment that can work out what you are watching on SOME tv screens - monitors use interfeirance blocking stuff to sort this - in the early 80s i believe companies used to poach information by standing outside other companies and using equipment that could 'read' a screen by looking at the radiation its giving out. i suspect this is still possible on a majority of tvs, maybe not 100hz and cirtainly not tfts (not sure about plasmas but its doubtful). i dont know if the vans use this kit - but it would be worthwhile, say the kit costs 100k, in a single day it could easily pick up 10 people and help get a grand off each.. in 10 days its paid itself off... as i said i dunno if the kit is in use or not.

i would have thought that when you buy a tv and give your details over that somewhere in the smallprint there should be something saying that they are going to give your details over to the beeb. im not sure thou

incidentally, i think tv licences should be abolished, and the money should just be raised thru taxes. i mean the majority of people wont complain about a ~£50 increase in tax - most people would barely notice it, and it would save people skimping by not paying their licences (i know it wouldnt be 100% fair - some people would maybe pay more than others and some people would pay without useing a tv, but then i have to pay tax which goes towards breast cancer treatment, which i will never use, and dont winge, and i dont see it as any different to that)

[Allen]

I will be paying but I'm skint at the mo so its had to wait

Furry muff!

[5lab]

incidentally, i have a mate from my old uni whose house got visited TWICE by licence inspectors, both times they came in and found 'illigal' tvs, and niether time they got fined. they were simply asked to buy a licence, as apparently getting a grand off students is far more hassle than its worth...

[revol68]

big al u ever think full stop

[Allen]

big al u ever think full stop

Would you like to elaborate on that? Coz I'm totally

[revol68]

let me glarify that rather rude point i just made.

it is a tax that hits unfairly on the poor, 120 quid is a lot more to me than it is to some stock broker on 100,000 a year.

Also al ur very niave if u think that if everyone paid the price would go down.. hmm cd's and dvds are goin down in cost because of online filesharing so ur completely wrong regarding that.

also why should a fund a broadcasting company that pumps out british state propaganda.

My friend works for the bbc and he doesnt have a license, they pay him 11,000 a year whilst his boss is on 250,000 so rightly he doesnt give two flying poo's about the bbc.

working class people have little enough, 120 quid is quite alot of money to me especially when i just bought a 9600xt

and they are now talking about bringing in water charges and bin charges which will cost the average household 1200 quid a year that is double taxation and it is a first step to the privitisation of those services.

[Allen]

Look, I know you're pissed off with pretty much everything, but there are some things which are the law and you just have to bite the bullet and pay... If you don't wanna pay, then don't watch it.

I've gone without TV for 2 months now, it's not that hard! Full of crap anyway! Would much rather spend £100 on DVD's.

[revol68]

big al nice way to dodge the issue .. im pretty pissed at working class people being continually screwed over yes but my points still stand and u have avoided answering them.

since when did the law ever mean we have to accept it??? laws are made by the rich and used to justify their economic thieving, from slavery to anti union laws, it remains one law for us one law for them.

Also in Northern ireland people didn't just bite the bullet they used to put up posters warning local people that the tv license lot were in the area along side the registration details of van and when they came into the area they would get stoned back out. Crude, not exactly ideal but extremely effective. (the same was done for the dole touts)

[revol68]

u miss my point if u own a tv which can recieve a signal then u have to pay whether or not u watch their guff, i own a tv for my playstation 2 and my dvds so i still need a license.

Plus if i can get something for free im goin to take it especially if it is a childish and puerile way of giving to fingers to the rich

[nichomach]

Have you ever thought that your attitude towards this is causing others to pay more? Same goes with piracy, insurance and many other things that people don't pay for/steal/whatever...

If everyone paid their licence's do you think it would be as expensive? If everyone paid their insurance do you think it would be as expensive? If everyone paid for DVD's/games/music do you think they would be as expensive?

Why don't you all pay it and watch TV legally?

I agree with the point about an obligation to follow the law; if you don't want to fund it, don't watch TV. Don't want to pay for a game, don't play it. I think it's naive in the extreme, however, to suppose that if more people gave them money then the license fee would go down, just as I think it's naive to suppose that stopping piracy would make DVDs or games or music any cheaper than it is. These companies (and I include the BBC and by extension the government) charge what they think the majority of the market will bear, and an increase in paying customers wouldn't suddenly make them grow a conscience and cut their prices. Frankly, the only thing that DOES make them cut prices is a decrease in paying customers. They're in business and the only duty that they have is to maximise the dividends of their shareholders, and in the case of government to maximise the revenue generated from the license fee.

I don't agree with revol about the justification for lawbreaking in this instance, but I do believe he makes a valid point regarding the regressive nature of the "TV tax", and it's a view I hold with regard to other regressive taxes as well (such as VAT). Any tax whose burden inversely mirrors the taxed person's ability to pay it is inherently unfair.

[Allen]

I'm not after an arguement though revol68 so why do I have to answer to you?

Listen, I'm not happy about the class divides either, but it's there. I moan quite a lot about certain things, but at the end of the day there's really not much point as who'll listen to us, eh?

You gotta chill out dude, nearly every post you make here is aggresive. In 10 years or so you'll either be in jail for your anti-everythingness or you'll have a heart attack!

Looks like you're waiting for your Robin Hood...

[Allen]

u miss my point if u own a tv which can recieve a signal then u have to pay whether or not u watch their guff, i own a tv for my playstation 2 and my dvds so i still need a license.

Plus if i can get something for free im goin to take it especially if it is a childish and puerile way of giving to fingers to the rich

Well, I agree with you on the first part, coz it's plain stupid. That should be changed. But I think throwing stones at the TV vans is just irresponsible. If you wanna stick two fingers up at the Rich, then stop giving them you're money.

[revol68]

im not aggressive at all if u met me in real life u'd pee urslef, honestly.

and im far from anti-everything i support lots of things and lots of people so don't paint me as some angst ridden lil brat cos im far from it.

remember being anti something implies a positive as well, it just depends how u word it.

and if u don't want to debate something then don't post about it.

im not waiting for a robin hood im actively involved in labour activism and have done solidarity and support work for the fire fighters, immigrant rights and anti sectarianism. I didn't bring up the tv license topic so get off my back please, i was just replying to ur post which i felt was a tad niave.

and big al u know my style so im suprised u take this personally, goddamnit it is a internet forum grow thicker skin.

[revol68]

also how do u suggest i stop givin them my money???? stop eating, no electricity.. man that is for hippies not cool pimpin urban revolutionary mack dadddies like me, this cat wants to be free but he also wants his playstaion.

[G4Z]

lol, I think it would be more expensive for me to pay it.

but to be honst I think the bbc should be funded by ad's. I dont see why I have to pay for it if I dont want it. could happily live without the bbc. the only thing I watch really is bbc news 24, usually watch this when the ad's are on

shocking I know, but I just dont want to pay out moeny if I can avoid it. I feel I already pay for it by paying my cable bill. the cable company pay for the bbc channels and I pay them, so why pay twice?

the other thing, is that the bbc show their channels worldwide and the whole world does not pay a license fee, so why the hell should I?