TV License and laptops.

Hobbes

Was on FM104 this morning so could of just been a windup. But they mentioned that RTE are looking into that if you own a laptop that you need to own a TV license?

I've heard before that if you didn't own a TV but had a computer in the house they could ask for a TV license but I have never heard of anyone being pulled up on that.

Also they mentioned laptop because it wouldn't be covered by the house license (as its portable)

KTRIC

Eh, my laptop doesn't have a tuner installed

I haven't bought a licence for my 42' plasma and I'm certainly not buying one for a frickin laptop.

Jip

You misheard the story slightly but FM104s dramatic headline didn't help much either.

If a household already has a T.V. licence there's no need for any additional licences no matter how many laptops or desktops that are capable of receiving television exist.
The new legislation is aimed at people who have no T.V. in the house but do use their desktops or laptops to view television.

Hobbes

KTRIC wrote:

Eh, my laptop doesn't have a tuner installed

Because you can recieve programs via the internet or play DVD/movies on it then according to the description it would fall under the TV license. (As they said)

Owen

They would need to prove you have a TV Tuner card in your laptop/desktop. As the previous poster stated, if you have a 42inch Plasma and don't watch TV, but do use it for your Xbox, you're okay. It's just an expensive monitor :-)

Hobbes

You do not need a TV tuner card to have the laptop fall under the description of a TV licence as you can recieve it over the internet now.

I also didn't mishear FM104, they said that because the laptop is portable it isn't classed as part of the house licenses. If that was the case then if you own two houses you would only need 1 TV licence (as you could claim the TV was from the other house).

layke

Knock Knock*

Door opens

Me : Yes? Can I help you?
TV Guys : Hi i'm here to check your TV license please.
Me : I don't own a TV, sorry.
TV guy : Do you own a laptop or a Personal Computer sir?
Me : yup.
Tv Guy : Well can they recieve terrestrial channels?
Me : No, ony torrents of TV shows & movies, like any computer potentially can.
Tv Guy : May I come in and see your system
Me : No.
*Door slams shut in face*
*Tv Guy Sobs helplessly*

miles teg

ned78 wrote:

...As the previous poster stated, if you have a 42inch Plasma and don't watch TV, but do use it for your Xbox, you're okay. It's just an expensive monitor :-)

I don' think that true. If you have tv in your house, you need a license regardless of what you use it for. Here's a link:
http://www.oasis.gov.ie/public_utilities/telecommunications/tv_licences.html

Hobbes

yea if you have any device in your house capable of receiving TV programs and isn't doing so you need a TV licence.

If you have a broken TV for example only in the house you need a TV licence.

Jip

Hobbes wrote:

I also didn't mishear FM104, they said that because the laptop is portable it isn't classed as part of the house licenses.

If a house already has a T.V. licence you will not need an additional one for a laptop within that house.

KTRIC

Am I the only one here that thinks this sounds absolutly absurd ??

Its a f**king laptop , not a tv. In other words they want to get people to pay for the privalage of being able to watch a "downloaded" show on their laptop.

It looks like another stealth tax.

Hobbes

If a house already has a T.V. licence you will not need an additional one for a laptop within that house.

The point was the laptop is portable.

KTRIC wrote:

Am I the only one here that thinks this sounds absolutly absurd ??

If its true I agree.

Jip

It's not just laptops, it also includes desktops.

Quoted from todays Independent....

However, only one €158 licence fee must be paid per household regardless of how many TVs or PCs are in a home. So the change in legislation will not target people who already pay the fee.

subway

i ahve a portable, handheld tv which i dont need a license for,
why would i need it for a laptop?

and if a 42" plasma doenst have a tuner installed you dont need a license as it cannot receive any signal.

the fact that a device plays dvds is not grounds for a license requiremetn,
dvds are paid for in advance and then licensed to the owner for whatever purpose the eula states.

miles teg

subway wrote:

i ahve a portable, handheld tv which i dont need a license for,
why would i need it for a laptop?

and if a 42" plasma doenst have a tuner installed you dont need a license as it cannot receive any signal.

the fact that a device plays dvds is not grounds for a license requiremetn,
dvds are paid for in advance and then licensed to the owner for whatever purpose the eula states.

You do need a license for a portable tv. If you don't believe the link I posted earlier, here's a case specifically involving a portable tv:
http://www.comhairle.ie/social/social_update_2004part2.html

miles teg

another interesting link regarding mobile phones with tv functionality:

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/8273721?view=Eircomnet

subway

i think your picking and choosing what you want to read.

i have a license for my household and am therefore licensed to use a portable tv of my own ownership in other places.

the link you posted has little or no relevance in this instance since it relates to someone not in possesion of a license.

Hobbes

subway wrote:

i have a license for my household and am therefore licensed to use a portable tv of my own ownership in other places.

So by your defination if I buy a TV and leave it in my sisters house she doesn't have to pay a TV license because I am paying for one in my house.

I'd love to see what the outcome of that would be in court.

miles teg

subway wrote:

i think your picking and choosing what you want to read.

i have a license for my household and am therefore licensed to use a portable tv of my own ownership in other places.

the link you posted has little or no relevance in this instance since it relates to someone not in possesion of a license.

Well I chose to read all of your previous post and you didn't mention anything about already owning a license.
Plus Hobbes is right. A license relates to a premises, not a particular piece of equipment.

Paulw

It seems that people have a problem reading. The law is clear -

"If your household, business or institution possesses a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal, you are required by law to have a television licence. Even if the television or other equipment is broken and currently unable to receive a signal, it is regarded as capable of being repaired so it can receive a signal and you must hold a licence for it. Failure to produce evidence of a television licence to an inspector can result in a court appearance and on conviction, you can receive a substantial fine."

This is now being changed so that any device capable of receiving any broadcast (even via the internet) then falls under this law. So, laptop, desktop, even portable devices such as Creative Zen Vision:M, or potentially your 3G mobile phone all qualify.

miles teg

Paulw wrote:

It seems that people have a problem reading. The law is clear -

"If your household, business or institution possesses a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal, you are required by law to have a television licence. Even if the television or other equipment is broken and currently unable to receive a signal, it is regarded as capable of being repaired so it can receive a signal and you must hold a licence for it. Failure to produce evidence of a television licence to an inspector can result in a court appearance and on conviction, you can receive a substantial fine."

This is now being changed so that any device capable of receiving any broadcast (even via the internet) then falls under this law. So, laptop, desktop, even portable devices such as Creative Zen Vision:M, or potentially your 3G mobile phone all qualify.

couldn't put it better myself.

Hobbes

miles teg wrote:

A license relates to a premises, not a particular piece of equipment.

Exactly which is why all the contention. If you have an item that can get TV broadcasts (through whatever means) and is portable it is no longer part of the premises. As someone pointed out in a link earlier.

subway

my apologies to miles teg.
i honestly mistyped my original post.

i was meant to state that i have a license for my home and as i am the owner of the item i am covered as it is a mobile, not permanent device.

i didnt have time to re read it as i am busy at thr minuite.
i will try to reply fully later on.

miles teg

subway wrote:

my apologies to miles teg.
i honestly mistyped my original post.

i was meant to state that i have a license for my home and as i am the owner of the item i am covered as it is a mobile, not permanent device.

i didnt have time to re read it as i am busy at thr minuite.
i will try to reply fully later on.

not to worry. Personally, I think things are getting a bit fuzzy with more portable/mobile devices on the market (hence the redefining of the law), but after all the debate, if someone is going to watch the telly, just buy a license and save yourself the hassle of possible convictions

generalmiaow

Where is "television signal" defined in the law? Does watching a youtube video count as receiving a television signal?

Paulw

It's not the fact of what you watch, it's the fact that your device can watch content.

So, since you can watch content from youtube, then you technically can watch/download/stream content from rte.ie etc.

MOH

OK, I didn't hear the report earlier, I'm just going by what I've read in this thread and what's in the 'news report' on the fm104 website:

"Tv licence for your laptop
You could need a TV license for your laptop. Under new proposals people who watch TV programmes on their computer will have to fork out the fee. Licence fee inspectors currently don't go after people who watch TV on their PCs. But under the draft Broadcasting Bill the definition of a 'television set' is likely to be expanded to include PCs, laptops - it could even be extended to mobile phones. However, in a significant change only one licence fee will have to be paid per household regardless of how many TVs or PCs are in a home. "

Dunno what they're on about in the last sentence. You only need one licence fee as it is regardless of how many TVs you have. From OASIS:
"If the equipment capable of receiving a television signal (i.e., a television set, a personal computer), etc. is held in a household (i.e., apartment, flat, house), then one television licence will cover multiple pieces of equipment. "

I'd imagine any change more aimed at people who don't have a TV but watch TV through a tuner card on their desktop/laptop. That would be covered by the current law as PC + tuner card = equipment capable of receiving a television signal.

Changing the law to go after people who watch streamed or torrented TV over the internet would involve changing the definition of what a television signal is, which would open a whole can of worms. Does that mean you need a licence for your mobile phone? In case you sign up for Premiership highlights?

Plus since the whole point of the TV licence is to fund public service broadcasting, until RTE start broadcasting on the web, I can't see them getting away with charging a fee in this way.

Paulw

RTE do broadcast some content online (news etc).

Yes, they have said that they will define the new law, which may well include mobile phones and portable devices.

Any device capable of receiving a signal of video content.

One license covers all devices in that property.

MOH

Sorry for the double post, but the proposals for the new broadcasting bill are published for comment here

In particular, Part 6 on this page, sections 51 and 52 define broadcasting and televisions:

Section 51 has:
"television set" means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasts broadcast for general reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction therewith) and any software or assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus.

“television broadcasting” means the initial transmission by wire or over the air, including that by satellite, in unencoded or encoded form, of television programmes intended for reception by the public. It includes the communication of programmes between undertakings with a view to their being relayed to the public. It does not include communication services providing items of information or other messages on individual demand such as telecopying, electronic data banks and other similar services.

Unfortunately section 52 then has:
"Objective of this head is to empower the Minister to make secondary legislation designating a device or software programme to be a television set (within the context of the definition of a television set provided in Head 51). "

Which kind of leaves it up to the Minister to decide what is and isn't a TV. And given past Ministers' wonderful track record on technological issues like broadband, we'll probably end up needing licences for everything from a plasma TV to a PSP.

generalmiaow

In order to receive the RTE.ie web broadcasts it would be necessary to not only have a PC, but an internet connection, or at least the capability of having an internet connection (a modem, say) too. I wonder would the new rule apply to computers without internet connections or modems? I'm sure many of these exist in shops, for example, and I'm sure a good few shops don't have TV licences.

bringitdown

You can see the text of the propsed bill at:
http://www.econsultation.ie/

You can also register your observations should you want to.

Red Alert

but that's silly - nobody's forcing RTE to make anything available online. that's like making us all pay a fine because our computers could receive child porn sites.

Hobbes

generalmiaow wrote:

In order to receive the RTE.ie web broadcasts it would be necessary to not only have a PC, but an internet connection, or at least the capability of having an internet connection (a modem, say) too. I wonder would the new rule apply to computers without internet connections or modems? I'm sure many of these exist in shops, for example, and I'm sure a good few shops don't have TV licences.

According to the new legistation just having a software program that is capable of displaying media counts as needing a license. So Windows Media player would mean you need a license.

[edit] read it all. this is total bollox. They should do away with the Fee altogether.

dazberry

If this is taken at face value - most likely every company that has a PC, Internet access(?) and any form of codec installed is likely to face a threat of needing a TV licence? Can't see that going down too well myself.

D.

gerryo

Does this mean all tourists & other temporary visitors to Ireland will need to purchase a TV licence if they have a laptop or phone with the ability to view streamed content? Who is going to check or will they be OK, because they are non-residents

What about companies with several PC's, why should they have to buy a licence when nobody watches TV on the PC's. Schools would also be affected.

We'll be (once again) the laughing stock of Europe (possibly the world) if this gets passed into law.

Hobbes

gerryo wrote:

Does this mean all tourists & other temporary visitors to Ireland will need to purchase a TV licence if they have a laptop or phone with the ability to view streamed content? Who is going to check or will they be OK, because they are non-residents

Short answer is yes. According to the earlier links one such case happened.

What about companies with several PC's, why should they have to buy a licence when nobody watches TV on the PC's. Schools would also be affected.

Well a school would have at least one TV anyway. But yea it would be a pain for smaller companies. Btw according to the rules Premises + your vehicle are defined as seperate locations.

What amazed me as well is how easy they can get a search warrent as well if you refuse to let them into your house/car.

MOH

Based on reading the full text of the proposal:
If your vehicle is considered seperate from your house;
and if a laptop/mobile phone is considered a piece of television equipment;

and
"In a prosecution for an offence under section 53 in which it is shown that a television set was in a particular vehicle on a particular day, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is shown by the defendant, that on that day the television set was in the possession of the owner of the vehicle"

Does that mean if I'm in a car, with a laptop, the car owner needs to have a TV licence?

This whole thing is nuts.

Tom Dunne

MOH wrote:

“television broadcasting” means the initial transmission by wire or over the air, including that by satellite, in unencoded or encoded form, of television programmes intended for reception by the public. It includes the communication of programmes between undertakings with a view to their being relayed to the public.

This covers traditional broadcasting, i.e. cable tv, UHF and satellite.

It does not include communication services providing items of information or other messages on individual demand such as telecopying, electronic data banks and other similar services.

And this covers computers and mobile phones, both of which can only be used via a communication service, i.e. the internet or the mobile phone network.

So hysteria over. Let's all take a deep breath and calm down.

Hobbes

tom dunne wrote:

So hysteria over. Let's all take a deep breath and calm down.

Go read the admendments to the laws they are currently trying to pass, it does in fact relate to Software, Routers, PCs.

For example from the new bill:

"television set" means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasts broadcast for general reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction therewith) and any software or assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus.

"electronic communications network" means transmission systems including, where applicable—
(a) switching equipment,
(b) routing equipment,
(c) other resources,
which permit the conveyance of signals by wire, by radio, by optical or by other electromagnetic means, and such conveyance includes the use of—
(i) satellite networks,
(ii) electricity cable systems, to the extent that they are used for the purposes of transmitting signals,
(iii) fixed terrestrial networks (both circuit-switched and packet-switched, including the Internet),
(iv) mobile terrestrial networks,
(v) networks used for either or both radio and television broadcasting, and
(vi) cable television networks,
irrespective of the type of information conveyed;

Tom Dunne

And if you look under section 53 there is provision to exempt certain devices:

Notes
The objective of subsections (1) to (3) of this head is to subject the possession of television sets to licencing requirements. Subsection (3) empowers the Minister to exempt a class or description of television sets from the licensing requirement, for example domestic personal computers or mobile handsets capable of exhibiting television pictures.

Ok, so I haven't read the whole act, and selective quoting is best left to religious fundamentalists.

I honestly don't see how legistlation such as this can be introduced with such wide ramifications. Not to mention how this could be enforced, as most of the posters have correctly pointed out.

Hobbes

It is only a provision and doesn't say that they are actually avoiding using PCs, only that they can remove them from the list at a later time.

Also still if a PC doesn't fall under it why say software? Or internet.

Or a good example is, if my sister in her house watches TV on a PC via a Slingblade in my house, who pays the TV license?

I also can't see how it would be enforced as it amounts to a stealth tax. But then people said the same thing about bin charges.

Tom Dunne

Hobbes wrote:

It is only a provision and doesn't say that they are actually avoiding using PCs, only that they can remove them from the list at a later time.

Also still if a PC doesn't fall under it why say software? Or internet.

I would imagine software is in there as catch-all to cover items such as set-top boxes, which are essentially glorified computers. Internet - yes, I accept this is worrying.

Hobbes wrote:

Or a good example is, if my sister in her house watches TV on a PC via a Slingblade in my house, who pays the TV license?

I also can't see how it would be enforced as it amounts to a stealth tax. But then people said the same thing about bin charges.

I can't see this being enforced due to the ever-changing technical landscape. If you were to say to the average TV inspector, it's a Slingblade (Slingbox?), is he/she liable to understand what the technicalities of it are? What if a new devices comes onto the market, taking an different approach? Legislation would have to be continually updated, as would the people enforcing such legislation.

Call me naive, call me plain stupid, but I just can't see this being enacted, never mind enforced.

Gurgle

The TV license is a 'Television Ownership' fine in the first place.

Its 40 years out of date, from way back when a TV was a luxory and only people who were well off could afford one. Then it would have been unreasonable to pay for RTE's public service out of the national coffers. Now everyone has one and the TV license is just another poll-tax in disguise.

Government should just write RTE a cheque once a year anyway and do away with the whole bloody thing.

The new legislation is no less reasonable than the old setup. It's already punishing you for being honest.

gerryo

Gurgle wrote:

Government should just write RTE a cheque once a year anyway and do away with the whole bloody thing.

Can the government still do that, or will some EU (busy)body consdier it an illegal subsidy? I suppose if it is a Public Service, then that might be OK, but then it would have to be "free for all"

Gurgle

gerryo wrote:

Can the government still do that, or will some EU (busy)body consdier it an illegal subsidy? I suppose if it is a Public Service, then that might be OK, but then it would have to be "free for all"

AFAIK, the fact thats its considered a Public Service is the only justification they have for taking the TV license money and giving it all to the provider of 1% of our broadcasts, which has just as much advertising on as their rivals.

cormie

This is a joke, I have a laptop and never watch tv. In fact, if I moved into a brand new house, a tv would be one of the last things on my to-buy list, that's if I'd even buy one.

So the inspector comes to the door and says what exactly? What rights do they have and what rights do we have at the door? Is it just a matter of them taking your word?

What if you had some software to disable the device to be capable of receiving the signal or something like that:o

Tom Dunne

cormie wrote:

What if you had some software to disable the device to be capable of receiving the signal or something like that:o

This is my whole point - how do you enforce a law that is aimed at a moving target?

Do you say "all PC's, laptops and mobile phones - full stop" or do you say "all PC's, laptops and mobile phones that have software on them to receive moving pictures". You then get into the realm of device capability and software compatibility. Can you honestly see a TV inspector inspecting every piece of electronic gadgetry in your house? Can a TV inspector differentiate between a Windows 95 PC on dial up vs. a Core Duo machine with full broadband access? I think not.

Likewise with mobile phones - can all phones with colour screens watch videos? Probably those made in the last 2-3 years, but what about older phones?

There is too much ambiguity for this proposed legislation to be practical.

BrianD

You can buy a DTT (Digiter Terrestrial TV) USB stick that will turn any laptop into a TV. RTE are testing DTT now in Dublin and the north east. In the UK, they non-traditional devices such as mobile phones that can receive TV are only treated as "TV sets" if the content you are viewing is being broadcast simultaneously on traditional TV.