TV Licence - ALL TV licence discussion/queries in this thread.

radiowaves · 21-10-2013 6:28pm

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

When was the monochrome TV licence withdrawn?

Not sure, but it certainly lasted into this millenium.

EDIT: Sorry, Fred replied as I was...

The Cush · 21-10-2013 6:40pm

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

When was the monochrome TV licence withdrawn?

Ist Jan 2003 - S.I. No. 608/2002 - Television Licences Regulations 2002

Mike 1972 · 21-10-2013 7:18pm

The Cush wrote: »

Ist Jan 2003 - S.I. No. 608/2002 - Television Licences Regulations 2002

Some radio hobbyists might find this bit interesting..............

the holder shall not work or use any television set kept under the licence in such manner that emission of electro-magnetic energy therefrom interferes with the working of or otherwise injuriously affects any apparatus for wireless telegraphy lawfully kept or worked by any other person;

Fred Swanson · 21-10-2013 7:24pm

This post has been deleted.

radiowaves · 21-10-2013 7:28pm

Citizen's Advice seem to agree with my interpretation...

Every household, business or institution in Ireland with a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal (using an aerial, satellite dish, cable or other means) must have a television licence.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer_affairs/media/tv_licences.html

Fred Swanson · 21-10-2013 7:29pm

This post has been deleted.

Elmo · 21-10-2013 7:44pm

“television set” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving
and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general
reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on
the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or
assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;

IMO the piece in brackets is important. Ironical a monitor or a speaker aren't considered TV set as they require an apparatus to receive broadcasts for general reception.

radiowaves · 21-10-2013 7:58pm

I've got the answer to my VCR question.

What's been quoted here is the 2009 Broadcast Bill which clarified what requires a TV licence.

Prior to that what I believed (receive only) actually was the case.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I never owned a VCR that could display anything ..... yes they were capable of passing a signal to a display device, but that is something completely different.

So such a VCR in conjunction with a monitor, would require a licence ...... but either of those devices without the other's capability, would not.

A VCR was capable of receiving TV broadcasts - which is a little more than simply passing a signal.

cerastes · 21-10-2013 8:04pm

radiowaves wrote: »

Citizen's Advice seem to agree with my interpretation...

Quote:
Every household, business or institution in Ireland with a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal (using an aerial, satellite dish, cable or other means) must have a television licence.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer_affairs/media/tv_licences.html

I wasnt sure myself up to yesterday, I dont think their interpretation is incorrect or that it suggests an aerial or dish requires a licence, just how it reads

Any place with a televison or equipment that has a tuner
(that uses an aerial,dishcable or other means) their wording makes it even clearer to me it is just the tv (tuner) element,
its just defining in the brackets that it can be any means to receive the signal, not that the method of sending the signal to the tuner is reason for a licence

Although Id suggest, citizensadvice is just an informal guideline of whats required and someone has written the interpretation and it could be worded better?

radiowaves · 21-10-2013 8:07pm

cerastes wrote: »

I wasnt sure myself up to yesterday, I dont think their interpretation is incorrect or that it suggests an aerial or dish requires a licence, just how it reads

Any place with a televison or equipment that has a tuner
(that uses an aerial,dishcable or other means) their wording makes it even clearer to me it is just the tv (tuner) element,
its just defining in the brackets that it can be any means to receive the signal, not that the method of sending the signal to the tuner is reason for a licence

Although Id suggest, citizensadvice is just an informal guideline of whats required and someone has written the interpretation and it could be worded better?

I think, like me, they are basing their licence requirement beliefs on pre-2009 legislation.

Antenna · 21-10-2013 8:38pm

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Any figures available as to how many monochrome (B/W) TV licences were issued in the final year of its existance.

BTW Are there any historical figures of TV licences (with geographical breakdown) available for before RTE/TE going on air? (1961-end of). Curious to see the extent and usage of Band I BBC reception (via the long defunct 405-line system) before RTE/TE existed

radiowaves · 21-10-2013 8:49pm

Antenna wrote: »

Any figures available as to how many monochrome (B/W) TV licences were issued in the final year of its existance.

In 1999 it was 14,000.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/one-in-10-tv-viewers-exposed-as-licence-dodgers-26133588.html

shruikan2553 · 21-10-2013 8:57pm

radiowaves wrote: »

In 1999 it was 14,000.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/one-in-10-tv-viewers-exposed-as-licence-dodgers-26133588.html

Nice to see that even then everyone without a TV licence was an evader or dodger. Nobody can survive without a TV!

Elmo · 21-10-2013 9:42pm

The TV licence replaced the Radio Licence. However not sure when the Radio Licence finished 1962 or 1966 the year RÉ and TÉ merged.

Fred Swanson · 21-10-2013 9:46pm

This post has been deleted.

The Cush · 21-10-2013 9:48pm

Elmo wrote: »

The TV licence replaced the Radio Licence. However not sure when the Radio Licence finished 1962 or 1966 the year RÉ and TÉ merged.

1st Sept 1972

zg3409 · 21-10-2013 10:07pm

Antenna wrote: »

Any figures available as to how many monochrome (B/W) TV licences were issued in the final year of its existance.

My parents had a black a white TV and a black and white licence long after most people had colour sets. The inspector came in and checked it. He attempted to twiddle knobs on it, as some people used to turn the colour knob down, so the TV appeared to be black and white, even though it was a colour set. The poor chap was very dissapointed to find it was in fact a black and white only set

Those were the days where the sound started, but it took 5 minutes for the picture to appear. We were often sent into the sitting room to "warm up" the TV set for the news, and often missed the picture for the start of shows!

Johnboy1951 · 21-10-2013 11:09pm

radiowaves wrote: »

A VCR was capable of receiving TV broadcasts - which is a little more than simply passing a signal.

The clear point I made was that receiving (and processing) the signal does not itself require a licence, unless the signal is passed on to a device which can 'exhibit' the broadcast signal.

It matters not whether that display device was part of the VCR device or an external device.

A licence is required only when a device (or a combination of devices) is/are capable of receiving the broadcast signal (processing it presumably) and displaying/'exhibiting' it.

Elmo · 21-10-2013 11:47pm

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

The clear point I made was that receiving (and processing) the signal does not itself require a licence, unless the signal is passed on to a device which can 'exhibit' the broadcast signal.

It matters not whether that display device was part of the VCR device or an external device.

A licence is required only when a device (or a combination of devices) is/are capable of receiving the broadcast signal (processing it presumably) and displaying/'exhibiting' it.

The act states clearly that it is any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting tv broadcasts even if it is
dependent on anything else

e.g. a VCR is electronic apparatus that can receive tv broadcasts though a licence is required for the VCR even though it is dependent on something else to exhibit the transmission e.g. A Monitor/A Projector.

A VCR actually has the ablity to receive and exhibit in conjunction with another appuratus for exhibit on the other hand a monitor cannot receive and therefore cannot exhibit unless attached to a device that can receive such a signal.

At least that is my reading of it.

“television set” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving
and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general
reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on
the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or
assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;

Johnboy1951 · 22-10-2013 1:01am

If you really want to study the wording of that definition only, then how about this ......

“television set” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;

"any electronic apparatus" ..... this is a single device with no allowance made here for a plurality of devices.

"capable of" .... something broken is not capable at the time

"receiving and exhibiting" ..... "and" means it must be capable of both .... still referring to the single device.

"dependent on the use of anything else" ..... could easily be interpreted to mean an aerial or other such device. Remember the receiver and the display are already specified in the first singular device.

"in conjunction with it" ...... again this strengthens the interpretation of a single device ("it").

"and any software or assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;" ..... this is an alternative definition of a TV set which was added to cover reception by a PC with tuner card.

Reading the wording strictly, and putting aside the PC situation, it would appear that the 'receiving and exhibiting' device is specified as a single device.

So a VCR feeding a monitor would not be covered by this interpretation of the wording, as the receiver is in a separate device to the exhibiting device.
Just as a monitor would not require a licence as it does not have a receiver, even though it is capable of exhibiting the received broadcast.

That is not the general interpretation, but is something one could think about.

TBH, this is a rather pointless exercise as the 'licence' is soon to be replaced by a different 'tax'.

Have fun

EDIT:

If they really wanted to make it simple they could have defined a TV set something like this ....

'any device or combination of devices capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services'

Because they didn't it might appear they did not mean that.

radiowaves · 22-10-2013 9:06am

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

The clear point I made was that receiving (and processing) the signal does not itself require a licence, unless the signal is passed on to a device which can 'exhibit' the broadcast signal.

It matters not whether that display device was part of the VCR device or an external device.

A licence is required only when a device (or a combination of devices) is/are capable of receiving the broadcast signal (processing it presumably) and displaying/'exhibiting' it.

The clear point I made is that the definition you've been highlighting is from the 2009 Broadcast Act (which hardly applies to VCRs anyway) and I've already agreed with you on that. The Broadcasting Act in 2009 clarified what was needed for a licence - before that anyone in possession of (say) a VCR or satellite receiver ie any device capable of receiving broadcast signals, even without a TV, required a licence.

Elmo · 22-10-2013 10:39am

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

If you really want to study the wording of that definition only, then how about this ......

"any electronic apparatus" ..... this is a single device with no allowance made here for a plurality of devices.

"capable of" .... something broken is not capable at the time

"receiving and exhibiting" ..... "and" means it must be capable of both .... still referring to the single device.

"dependent on the use of anything else" ..... could easily be interpreted to mean an aerial or other such device. Remember the receiver and the display are already specified in the first singular device.

"in conjunction with it" ...... again this strengthens the interpretation of a single device ("it").

"and any software or assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;" ..... this is an alternative definition of a TV set which was added to cover reception by a PC with tuner card.

Reading the wording strictly, and putting aside the PC situation, it would appear that the 'receiving and exhibiting' device is specified as a single device.

So a VCR feeding a monitor would not be covered by this interpretation of the wording, as the receiver is in a separate device to the exhibiting device.
Just as a monitor would not require a licence as it does not have a receiver, even though it is capable of exhibiting the received broadcast.

That is not the general interpretation, but is something one could think about.

TBH, this is a rather pointless exercise as the 'licence' is soon to be replaced by a different 'tax'.

Have fun

EDIT:

If they really wanted to make it simple they could have defined a TV set something like this ....

'any device or combination of devices capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services'

Because they didn't it might appear they did not mean that.

You left out weather or not

But it's all a bit of a damp squid me lord

radiowaves · 22-10-2013 11:24am

Elmo wrote: »

You left out weather or not

But it's all a bit of a damp squid me lord

When I first read the 2009 Broadcast Act wording (being quoted as if it was always the way licensing worked) I too picked up on what you've highlighted.

You make a good point but I think it means that the apparatus might be a TV set with nothing connected that will display broadcast signals ie for sole use with an XBox for example.

In other words even if you've no aerial, rabbits ears, dish or cable hooked up to your TV it still requires a licence.

However what, other than a TV set, is capable of displaying conventional broadcast pictures? A PC with a tuner card certainly is yet that was made exempt in the 2009 Act.

So why didn't they just say "TV set" in the Act? Why leave it open to confusion?

Could it be that "apparatus" might also mean a VCR or satellite receiver, either of which are certainly capable of receiving and displaying broadcast pictures even though in each case their use is dependent on something else (a TV set). Does the Act cover this when stating?: "whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction with it".

A satellite receiver is an electronic apparatus capable of receiving broadcast pictures and (via a TV set) displaying them. Its use for [that] purpose is dependent on the use of something else in conjunction with it.

So, are we back to square one? Is Citizen's Advice right after all? That is their purpose after all - to advise.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter at this point. We will all have to pay soon enough - whatever our set-up.

runawaybishop · 22-10-2013 11:40am

radiowaves wrote: »

However what, other than a TV set, is capable of displaying conventional broadcast pictures? A PC with a tuner card certainly is yet that was made exempt in the 2009 Act.

The act specifically calls out tuners as not being exempt.

Q. Do I require a television licence for a computer which can access television-like services (e.g. the RTÉ Player or streaming services) over the Internet?
A. No. So long as the computer is unable to display television channels distributed by conventional television broadcasting networks (i.e cable, satillite, IPTV, analogue terrestrial, digital terrestrial or MMDS) e.g. using a television tuner card or similar device, then there is no requirement to hold a television licence.

radiowaves · 22-10-2013 11:57am

runawaybishop wrote: »

The act specifically calls out tuners as not being exempt.

Q. Do I require a television licence for a computer which can access television-like services (e.g. the RTÉ Player or streaming services) over the Internet?
A. No. So long as the computer is unable to display television channels distributed by conventional television broadcasting networks (i.e cable, satillite, IPTV, analogue terrestrial, digital terrestrial or MMDS) e.g. using a television tuner card or similar device, then there is no requirement to hold a television licence.

Ah, fair enough. I read somewhere that PCs were exempt even with a TV tuner card.

runawaybishop · 22-10-2013 12:07pm

radiowaves wrote: »

Ah, fair enough. I read somewhere that PCs were exempt even with a TV tuner card.

Its actually the opposite, they are exempt unless they have one. The wording is less than clear throughout the whole act. In fairness though people read too much into it - if you can watch tv on it you need a license. You'd need to be pretty sure that a judge would agree with you also if it went to court.

radiowaves · 22-10-2013 12:17pm

runawaybishop wrote: »

The wording is less than clear throughout the whole act. In fairness though people read too much into it - if you can watch tv on it you need a license. You'd need to be pretty sure that a judge would agree with you also if it went to court.

I totally agree. As witnessed in the previous 20 or so posts it is open to so much interpretation, but I believe we've established that any machine capable of receiving and outputting broadcast signals requires a licence, even if the machine itself is dependent on another machine (eg TV set!) to display said signals.

An Post inspectors; Citizen's Advice and previous court cases all seem to concur with this too.

Elmo · 22-10-2013 12:55pm

Actually a VCR has the capability to Receive and Exhibit Broadcast reception. It is a Mute point

as it is highly unlikely to own an apparatus that receives and not own an apparatus that can display the picture from the apparatus.

I don't think you need a licence for an Aerial or a Satellite Dish or cable connection as they do not exhibit or display without a "TV Set" as defined in the Act.

Monitor - No Licence Required as it does not have the capability to receive (on its own) and exhibit (on its own)
VCR, PVR - Licence Required as it does have the capability of receiving (on its own) and exhibiting (with another device)
Dish, Aerials, Cable connections - No Licence Required as they require a device that is capable of receiving a signal.

runawaybishop · 22-10-2013 1:07pm

Moot, not mute.

VCRs do not need a license.

radiowaves · 22-10-2013 1:16pm

runawaybishop wrote: »

Moot, not mute.

VCRs do not need a license.

It's licence not license

The wording (and Citizens' Advice and An Post inspectors) in the Act seems to suggest different

Or do VCRs not need one because they're considered obsolete?

I assume you agree Sat receivers do need a licence?

You haven't really expanded on why you've come to the conclusion you have so I'm second-guessing a bit...

TV Licence - ALL TV licence discussion/queries in this thread.

Comments