0

Discussion topic: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Reply
This message was authored by DorsetJon This message was authored by: DorsetJon

Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Morning,

I know I'm 100% right on this one.

Long story short,we were all watching the Nottingham Forest v Chelsea match in the pub,last night.

We'd all had a few beers,when someone raised the following question :-

"Are you sure you need to fork out over 150 quid for a tv licence,to be able to watch Sky?"

 

Safe to say a lot of the guys were unsure to what I told them,and had a bit of a shock.

 

Hence,why I've title this post"Agree to disagree"

Reply

All Replies

This message was authored by MarkGoldsmith This message was authored by: MarkGoldsmith

Re: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

Interesting - not really a discussion possible on this on this as it's essentially a tax that has a legal requirement to be paid under a set of circumstances. I think a lot of people think if they don't watch BBc they don't need a license fee which is factually incorrect as the license fee doesn't go directly to the BBC its essentially a tax that is used to fund the BBC.

 

A TV Licence is a legal permission to install or use television receiving equipment to watch TV channels on any TV service, watch live TV on streaming services, and to use BBC iPlayer*. This includes recording and downloading. On any device. 

Simply put unless you only watch on-demand shows on services other than BBC IPlayer (and S4C) and never watch a live stream on any service you have to pay for a TV license.



Sky Stream user. Former Sky+ HD and Sky Broadband customer
Please LIKE any responses you found helpful
Please mark a response as an ANSWER if it has solved your query/issue


NOT a Sky Employee

This message was authored by TimmyBGood This message was authored by: TimmyBGood

Re: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@DorsetJon wrote:

 

"Are you sure you need to fork out over 150 quid for a tv licence,to be able to watch Sky?"

 


It's useful to contemplate the word 'licence', as in 'permission to carry out an action'.

 

In this case, payment is licencing a premises for the reception of television 'as it is being broadcast' via any device and from any source.  That the revenue gathered goes to the BBC is actually incidental: the government of the day is required to renew that disbursement every decade (and could theoretically donate it to Battersea Dogs Home instead ; )

 

As @MarkGoldsmith indicates, this is essentially a legal bodge going back almost a century so that the 'state broadcaster' isn't funded through direct taxation and therefore subject to direct political control.

* * * * * * *

Sky Glass 55" (on ethernet) & two Stream Pucks (one ethernet / one WiFi)
BT Halo 3+ Ultrafast FTTP (500Mbs), BT Smart Hub 2
This message was authored by nolte This message was authored by: nolte

Re: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

As per https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one

 

A TV Licence covers you for:

  • All TV channels, like BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Dave and international channels
  • Pay TV services, like Sky, Virgin Media and BT
  • Live TV on streaming services, like YouTube and Amazon Prime Video
  • Everything on BBC iPlayer

This includes recording and downloading.

On any device.

---------
ROI sky Q Customer
This message was authored by gilbo2 This message was authored by: gilbo2

Re: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Umm, interesting. So if Sky were to market a device that only allowed the viewing of Sky Subscription channels, blocking out BBC/ITV/Freeview/iPlayer/Youtube/radio etc etc, would a TV license be required?

This message was authored by TimmyBGood This message was authored by: TimmyBGood

Re: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@gilbo2 

 

It's incredibly unlikely they would choose to do so even if that were permitted: being a regulated platform has obligations including PSB carriage.

 

Even if it happened, just possessing such a device isn't automatically a defence against an allegation of unlicensed consumption at an address, given that multiple other gadgets can also display live television.

 

Radio hasn't required a licence for many years.

* * * * * * *

Sky Glass 55" (on ethernet) & two Stream Pucks (one ethernet / one WiFi)
BT Halo 3+ Ultrafast FTTP (500Mbs), BT Smart Hub 2
This message was authored by TimmyBGood This message was authored by: TimmyBGood

Re: Forest vs Chelsea last night - Agree to disagree.

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@gilbo2 wrote:

 

 a device that only allowed the viewing of Sky Subscription channels

 


Live television from any source requires a licence.  Such a device could not display a broadcast or streaming channel EPG: by definition it would have to be 'catch-up' only.

* * * * * * *

Sky Glass 55" (on ethernet) & two Stream Pucks (one ethernet / one WiFi)
BT Halo 3+ Ultrafast FTTP (500Mbs), BT Smart Hub 2
Reply

Was this discussion not helpful?

No problem. Browse or search to find help, or start a new discussion on Community.

Start a new discussion

On average, new discussions are replied to by our users within 5 hours

New Discussion