The television, and Licenses

Stryder

Stryder

Keeper of "good" ideas.
Valued Senior Member
In the UK by law a person who owns a television that can receive broadcasts is suppose to pay a licensing fee. I haven't for a multiple of reasons:

1) I have not the capital
2) I do not agree with the law

I post this here because I at first ask, Where you are in the world and do you have to pay a license to watch television?

I gather if the EU consists of countries that do not use Licesnsing, then does this mean in the future when the countries come closer together to unite, that a person from say from another country than the UK that happens to stay in the UK has to know about a license? Or will it die a death?

Below is a letter I sent a court that I'm suppose to appear before in 1 month.

To whom it may concerns,

I'm not going to bother writing a letter, not because I lack content on the issue, but because it's time consuming and people tend to ridicule.

I'm just going to state that I will not be attending, purely for the same reason why I do not pay such licenses. I have no income, I told them that and they didn't listen.

If you don't like that fact, Arrest me, But you better have a better case than a license fee.

I will draw attention though to what I would mention in a court.

Why are television shops allowed to sell televisions without some form of Licensing attached? (Like 5 years or a rough lifespan of a television)

Why are there laws installed that fine me for picking up a signal that if wasn't plucked from the atmosphere would bounce around the ionosphere and cause a white noise of those particular frequencies, while also causing greenhouse gases to change molecular composition (in conjunction with mobile telephones).

If the airways are truly the property of a singular owner, then does that mean I should not breath as I don't own the air? Should not drink as I don't own the water?

My very brain is filled with thoughts that cause low frequency levels to be emitted, does that mean that I should be cut down like a pirate radio station antenna? Or that I should pay for the fine of thought?
Afterall the human mind has the capacity to see in colour because of it's method of neural interaction, where an electron passing through a neural pathway and meeting others on route, harmonizes halogens to resonate at particular spectral levels. The reason we see in colour.

Should I be fined for seeing in colour? Do I see the colours that you see?

The other point of the harmonizing of frequencies within the human biological system. Could television transmitions through the amplitude not interfer with thought patterns, as the transmissions of digital signals send solitons through myself, a solid in it's path. Could it not also be a source of long term problems like Lukemia which although uses radiology to treat can also have the reverse effect.

Could the interaction of other frequencies from a different direction (i.e. Horizontal interacting with Vertical) cause for a supposedly "Safe level" emission to become hazardous to the human body?

If any or all of these are the case, then I will refuse to pay for the destruction of the planet or people subjected to these wave formations. I will not only refuse but lobby if action is taken.

Regards,
Click to expand...

(Names and addresses withheld)

Thats how I feel about this law. I'm just after you views and comments on this subject.
 
Stryder

I doubt you'll win this one. At best they are going to fine you, probably a few thousand pounds.

As I'm sure you well know we don't pay to recieve TV signals in general. We are charged by government to pay for the BBC, being a public service broadcast not funded by advertising. If you have the facility to receive a BBC TV channel, you pay the license fee. End of story.

If you don't have the funds to pay the fee there are other options available, such as monthly direct debit or weekly payments to the post office. If you are student under 25 then you can get a cheaper license payment as part of your parents license. I've done that trick.

Whatever the cause of your financial conditon the courts simply are not bothered if you had a TV and no license.

FWIW, I agree in part with your stance. It's a sucky system we have but, rightly or wrongly, we have to pay. I personally think the Beeb now makes enough revenue to pay for itself. The license fee is a peurile attempt at fleecing the general public. They argue quality of programmes will suffer but I doubt it nowadays. May have been true in 1960's when we only had 1 channel but not in the modern age with hundreds of digital and satellite channels and the Beeb licensing programs abroad.
 
Yeah, the court doesn't care how you rationalize it. In their eyes, you did something wrong, you get punished.

I like the letter though, it's punchy, witty and to the point. I admire the courage to stand up for yourself.

-Xenu
 
tv licensing?

we dont have that here..... but we do have cable tv. -laughs-. if you want more than two channels, you have to pay about $30 per month. Do have to pay for your channels ontop of your licensing fee?
 
I think that as an annual licensing fee that they pay far less per year than we pay. The US is where the money is so we are really hit when it comes to paying for services.
 
I support you Stryder in your fight.:)
Emotionally unfortunatelly, I have not a strategic misile to launc at BBC HQ:(

ar regards payment- I pay 4 punds a month for 48 cable channels.

cheers!
 
4 pounds? hmm.... according to currency converter.... thats.. 6 us dollars??? that doesn't seem right..... well.. i hope not.. then im gett ing reallllly ripped off. :bugeye:
 
you are:D . It is right. 3.70Ls/month. 1 pound is 0.92Ls
so it is aproximately 4 british pounds for 48 channels

if you pay some 2 or 3 pounds more you get 60 channels

wait a min i'll get my price sheet if I can find it

no sorry, I can't find it. but I think it was something around 6.70 for 60 channels.

however I have to mind you tht it is illegal cable company.

one of our legal companies provides 40 channels for 4.10 GB pounds, so not much of a difference
 
Last edited:
what a silly law

the money for the ABC comes directly from the Australian Fed Budget

After all thats what our taxes are for, to paw for public projects and things (ok i can't think of any other word to use that puts health, defence, education, and social secruitys together)
 
Yes, we have that too. 5 Swedish crowns per day, about half a dollar. I pay , because I didn't use to, and I got so nervous everytime I heard somebody outside the door, or God forbid if someone rang the doorbell, because it could be one of those inspectors, that if you haven't payed the fee, the put a snail on your eye...it's true, ask anyone from Sweden and they will confirm it. :D
 
And that is only the license, which includes 3 channels. If you want to see more, which most people do, you have to pay extra 20 dollars per month to see cabel.
 
Now I undestand why folks from your country come to Estonia (neighbour country to the North) to get cheap alchocol and cigaretts.

I have also heard tht you have the biggest sallaries in all of the Europe though. so maybe half a dollar per day and a + of 20 $ isn't so much for you?:)
 
Yes, it's not that expensive for most people, but you can still feel pity for me and send me money. :D
 
I remember when an old age pensioner converted his TV,to only get the free channels,ie ITV channel 4,but they still did him for it Stryder,so I bet your for the chop mate! it was in all the news papers at the time.
 
By the way

It is illegal to drink water that has not been paid for in the UK,the water Co owns all the water that has ever fallen on this land.
Just the same as its illegal to generate electricity & use it over here,with out a licence from the generating Co.

:(
 
thank chu..no.. chuck..hmm..thuc... rrrr.. thank goodness for US!
public drinking fountains and rabbit eared TV! -laughs-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top