No more TV License?

Dannyboy83

Does this EU Directive now mean that it will be illegal for the government to charge for a TV License?

http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l24101.htm

The "Television Without Frontiers" Directive (TVWF Directive) is the cornerstone of the European Union's audiovisual policy. It rests on two basic principles: the free movement of European television programmes within the internal market and the requirement for TV channels to reserve, whenever possible, more than half of their transmission time for European works ("broadcasting quotas"). The TVWF Directive also safeguards certain important public interest objectives, such as cultural diversity, the protection of minors and the right of reply. In December 2005 the Commission submitted a proposal to revise the TVWF Directive.

oscarBravo

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Does this EU Directive now mean that it will be illegal for the government to charge for a TV License?

Why would it mean that?

Hookey

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Does this EU Directive now mean that it will be illegal for the government to charge for a TV License?

No. Although it does have some interesting implications for rights agreements. If I'm reading that correctly (and IANAL) then its saying you can't block transmission of European content to other member states. Which would mean the BBC iPlayer would need to opened up for all its domestic content and maybe the satellite footprints as well. Non-European content can still be targeted by territory. The debate would be whether you (as a broadcaster) have to make the content available, or just not actively block it; a sort of passive v. active argument.

It wouldn't get rid of the TV licence, because that's a licence to own a telly, doesn't have anything to do with the content you receive.

Dannyboy83

Why would it mean that?

Yes, you're correct mate, I should have said unethical not illegal.
*blows nose, looks at tissue*

Hookey wrote: »

No. Although it does have some interesting implications for rights agreements. If I'm reading that correctly (and IANAL) then its saying you can't block transmission of European content to other member states. Which would mean the BBC iPlayer would need to opened up for all its domestic content and maybe the satellite footprints as well. Non-European content can still be targeted by territory. The debate would be whether you (as a broadcaster) have to make the content available, or just not actively block it; a sort of passive v. active argument.

It wouldn't get rid of the TV licence, because that's a licence to own a telly, doesn't have anything to do with the content you receive.

Exactly, so does that not that render the subscription charge (TV License) invalid as a revenue generator?
Presumably, if everyone in Europe can watch the BBC for free, while the UK are paying for it?
Or everyone in France can watch RTE one for free, while we are paying for it?

Is this not unethical?
*scratches head, picks bum, smells finger*

greendom

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Or everyone in France can watch RTE one for free, while we are paying for it?*

I can't see that being too much of an issue tbh

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Hookey

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Exactly, so does that not that render the subscription charge (TV License) invalid as a revenue generator?
Presumably, if everyone in Europe can watch the BBC for free, while the UK are paying for it?
Or everyone in France can watch RTE one for free, while we are paying for it?

Is this not unethical?
*scratches head, picks bum, smells finger*

As the BBC are always quick to point out, the BBC is funded by the licence fee, but you don't pay the licence fee to fund the BBC. The licence fee is a tax on equipment to receive TV broadcasts that UK gov happens to give to the BBC (it also gives some to ITV and C4), and its not enshrined in law that they have to do that. You're right that this law could make people question the BBC's charter (even more than they do already), but it doesn't have anything to do with the licence fee itself, which even if the BBC lost its use, could stay.

wylo

We shouldnt be paying the license either way, RTE use adverts , not to mention the fact that we already pay chorus or sky who I can only imagine are paying RTE as well.

Dannyboy83

Hookey wrote: »

As the BBC are always quick to point out, the BBC is funded by the licence fee, but you don't pay the licence fee to fund the BBC. The licence fee is a tax on equipment to receive TV broadcasts that UK gov happens to give to the BBC (it also gives some to ITV and C4), and its not enshrined in law that they have to do that. You're right that this law could make people question the BBC's charter (even more than they do already), but it doesn't have anything to do with the licence fee itself, which even if the BBC lost its use, could stay.

I wasn't aware that the BBC give Ch4 money, I thought they were completely independent.
That puts a slightly different spin on it I guess.

Do you know if RTE give money to TV3?


I suppose it must be government grants as opposed to BBC grants.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/
What your licence fee provides

The BBC is paid for directly through each household TV licence. This allows it to run a wide range of popular public services for everyone, free of adverts and independent of advertisers, shareholders or political interests.

The BBC provides 8 interactive TV channels, 10 radio networks, more than 50 local TV and radio services, the BBC's website, and the on-demand TV and radio service, BBC iPlayer.

BBC World Service is funded by government grant and not the TV licence fee. Profits from separate BBC commercial services help to keep the licence fee low.

Dannyboy83

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If its not-live, no.
If its live, possibly. (and possibly illegal too, although you would be outside the UK jurisdiction, but anything they do, we can do better.............)

More here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_not_require_a_tv_1.html

At the moment, the legal position is that you don't need a licence to watch TV purely on-demand, but you do if you are watching TV live (through any receiving device in the home).
So a live simulcast over the web from the BBC - of, say, the Beijing Olympics - will require a TV licence, but watching an on-demand (non-live) stream or download through the BBC iPlayer will not.


The Help section for the iPlayer confirms the position under "Will I need a TV licence to watch programmes on BBC iPlayer?" It states that:

You do not need a television licence to watch television programmes on the current version of the BBC iPlayer. You will need to be covered by a TV licence if and when the BBC provides a feature that enables you to watch 'live' TV programmes on any later version of the BBC iPlayer which has this option... A 'live' TV programme is a programme which is watched or recorded at the same time (or virtually the same time) as it is being broadcast... [etc]

More here:
http://rooreynolds.com/2007/12/14/thoughts-on-tv-licensing/

Hookey

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I wasn't aware that the BBC give Ch4 money,

Well, technically its the Department of Media, Culture & Sport who give C4 the money, but they get it from the Licence fee. However, I've just looked it up and it turns out despite being granted the licence fee money in 2007, UK gov then changed its mind and its under review.

acontadino

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

umm yeah, well tv3 should be grand considering 90% of stuff on their schedule is european, or much more specifically british.

oscarBravo

Moved from Politics.

TvWatcher

Yes, RTÉ do give money to TV3: 7.5% of your license fee goes to the BCI Sound and Vision Fund, from which TV3 produced a number of its home-produced output last year and this year.

I think you are all misinterpreting the TV Without Frontiers initiative. I understand that this is an initiative that will require PSBs (RTÉ, BBC, etc) to commit to a minimum of indigenously produced content (european meaning irish, english, spanish etc). This is not a directive that implies PSBs wil need to broadcast into other territories.

As for the ethics of the license fee, I don't see how this directive serves as a mechanism for a debate around that. It is entirely distinct from the licence fee, which is a matter for sovereign governments.

Our man in Havana

This has been done to death.