andygardener Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 You're kidding yourself if you think development, testing, production, supply and support can be done for £170 million. I didn't say that. I said the payback would be a few years (ie multiples of £170m) and never suggested developing a new platform, just buy an existing product (the Sky one seems to work fine). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 The BBC is a business;a business is an enterprise which provides a service or goods using a range of resources,funded either by sales,subscriptions, or by government funding.This is taught on all good business courses. Have you been on all good business courses, or indeed any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 No I haven't. Read my post. ---------- Post added 20-03-2013 at 13:05 ---------- Which, if they've not been allowed into the house in the first place, they're not going to have. Exactly. This is what I've been trying to say all along. TV licensing have no powers. They ask your name They ask if you have a license They ask to search the premises. Notice something? yes, they are asking our consent. So all this talk or court orders is irrelevant. A court will never issue a warrant without sufficient evidence. And evidence is not being evasive and not answering questions - you are under no obligation to answer questions or give access to your property. If you follow the steps and a licensing man turns up on your door with a court order, even with police, don't let them in. ---------- Post added 20-03-2013 at 14:33 ---------- Plus, this is an act - it's not LAW. You've not murdered anybody or committed harm or loss in any way to any person (s). Not law. ---------- Post added 20-03-2013 at 14:35 ---------- Infact if you post an 'implied rights of access' notice on your door, then they are commiting an offense if they do not remove themselves from your land. ---------- Post added 20-03-2013 at 14:37 ---------- when asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 It is a law, law is formed by acts of parliament. And if they do turn up with a warrant then you have no choice but to let them in. Evidence BTW could include them hearing the TV on when you first answer the door to them. You don't need a notice on your door to require someone to leave your property BTW, you just need to tell them to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Have you been on all good business courses, or indeed any? As an external examiner I know that Edexcel,AQA and OCR all include this on their respective syllabuses.Do you still believe BBC is not a business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 It is a law, law is formed by acts of parliament. And if they do turn up with a warrant then you have no choice but to let them in. But they won't, cos they can't get a judge to issue a warrant without proper evidence. Evidence BTW could include them hearing the TV on when you first answer the door to them. Unlikely- it could be the radio, or a DVD. Also unlikely that a judge is going to issue a warrent on the basis of what a TV licensing employee claims. But, even if it were possible, if those wishing not to pay the license fee simply get into the habit of turning down the TV when answering the door, then it becomes totally irrelevant, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Ah Ch4... that's publicly owned you know.... and the reason it does all the investigative reporting is because it's or rather was required to do so as a condition of it's broadcast licence.... much like the BBC is under it's Charter... You do realise that Channel 4 were also attempting to dip into the licence fee pot. As have freeview and most of all the other "commerical companies" during the digital switchovers. When will people realise the licence fee is far far more than just BBC. Lets also think a little bit deeper into this. Where do you think Sky gets a lot of its contents from?? They have entire channels filled to the brim with syndicated BBC programming sold through their commerical arm. If it wasn't for the licence fee monies going to make these programmes in the first place what would these channels fill their time with. They might make a big song and dance about it but I would bet sky makes less than 20% of their own programming. With over 200 channels to fill that's a lot of dead air if they cannot source it from somewhere else. Could you imagine what the subscription fees would be if they had to fund ALL their own programmes. The fact is this. You are paying a licence fee for owning a television set that receives live broadcasts. Before that people had to have a radio licence so its hardly a new concept. You have to have one because the government says so. The government set television broadcasts up. The government set up the BBC and CHOSE for it to be funded by licence fee monies purely to avoid any commerical bias. Licence fees are in place all over the world. We should feel lucky that we have 10 channels which broadcast completely and utterly free of any annoying adverts, product placement or commerical bias. Other countries are not so lucky. Ireland for example has a TV licence just as costly as ours paying for thier "public service broadcaster" but they still have to put up with adverts too! Similarly the ABC in Australia and Télévisions1 in France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 You do realise that Channel 4 were also attempting to dip into the licence fee pot. As have freeview and most of all the other "commerical companies" during the digital switchovers. When will people realise the licence fee is far far more than just BBC. In about ten years time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HbroChris Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 Plus, this is an act - it's not LAW. You've not murdered anybody or committed harm or loss in any way to any person (s). Not law. Nope, still law. Specifically defined by the Communications Act 2003. The Act is law. I don't see how this can be much simpler. The whole murder/harm/dishonesty thing that you call "Common Law" is not the only set of laws you have to live by in our society. Consent doesn't enter in to it. ---------- Post added 20-03-2013 at 14:35 ---------- Infact if you post an 'implied rights of access' notice on your door, then they are commiting an offense if they do not remove themselves from your land. ---------- Post added 20-03-2013 at 14:37 ---------- when asked. Unless presumably they don't consent to your removal of their right to access. What happens then? FMotL stalemate? ---------- Post added 21-03-2013 at 00:42 ---------- I don't really resent the licence fee at all. We've just given up our Sky subscription because we watch everything on iPlayer, or Netflix or whatever and had little use for the full (ha!) Sky service. I think that the quality and breadth of programming that you get is incredible. The discussion about letting TVL in to your home (no, you probably don't have to unless they are with a police officer with a warrant, in which case you have no choice) is a bit of a moot point in my view. If you don't fulfill the requirements for a licence then let them satisfy themselves of that. If you do and, as some posters advocate, just prevent them from gathering evidence then you're still evading the licence fee. Which means that the programmes that I watch are slightly less well-funded even though we both watch them - I'm paying for them and you're not. Why is that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted March 21, 2013 Share Posted March 21, 2013 FMotL stalemate? LOL...I think Runnymede says my right to graze my goat on your John Thomas trumps your right to harvest my pubes every whitsuntide. We have a FMotL Mexican standoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.