Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > uk.tech.digital-tv > #249413 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-17 17:32 +0100 |
| Last post | 2026-06-21 09:19 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 97 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to uk.tech.digital-tv
BBC cuts (round 1?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-17 17:32 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) NY <me@privacy.net> - 2026-06-17 21:41 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) NY <me@privacy.net> - 2026-06-17 21:46 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> - 2026-06-19 11:14 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Abandoned Trolley <that.bloke@microsoft.com> - 2026-06-19 11:42 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> - 2026-06-20 11:00 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 12:44 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-22 13:22 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-22 13:25 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-22 13:29 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 13:32 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2026-06-22 13:52 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 14:12 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 07:10 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 09:17 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-06-23 09:22 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> - 2026-06-23 09:42 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 17:06 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-19 11:49 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> - 2026-06-20 11:04 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 12:29 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> - 2026-06-22 13:07 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 13:15 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-19 16:49 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-19 17:31 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-19 18:06 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) pinnerite <pinnerite@gmail.com> - 2026-06-19 18:41 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-19 20:30 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-20 08:52 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-20 11:04 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-20 09:54 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-20 10:58 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-20 14:37 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-20 15:32 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-20 16:24 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-20 17:20 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-20 17:54 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-20 21:59 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-20 22:02 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-20 23:02 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-21 10:40 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-21 11:02 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-20 22:03 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 12:33 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 07:14 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 09:19 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-23 09:37 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 17:11 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-23 17:33 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 20:36 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-23 20:57 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-23 22:38 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-24 06:17 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-24 09:08 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> - 2026-06-24 10:30 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-06-24 13:04 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-06-20 12:14 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2026-06-20 17:13 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-21 08:26 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-21 09:27 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-06-21 10:46 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2026-06-21 13:47 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2026-06-21 14:16 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> - 2026-06-21 10:24 +0000
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-21 19:32 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-06-21 21:33 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-22 07:29 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-06-22 08:56 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> - 2026-06-22 13:45 +0000
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-22 17:03 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 09:56 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> - 2026-06-22 08:58 +0000
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-22 12:04 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 13:10 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-22 15:23 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 15:40 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-22 18:01 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 07:22 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> - 2026-06-23 07:50 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-23 17:12 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> - 2026-06-22 10:13 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-22 13:18 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-22 13:29 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> - 2026-06-22 13:56 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> - 2026-06-23 12:35 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-23 12:49 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Abandoned Trolley <that.bloke@microsoft.com> - 2026-06-23 13:24 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2026-06-23 17:34 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Abandoned Trolley <that.bloke@microsoft.com> - 2026-06-24 08:25 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 08:48 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Abandoned Trolley <that.bloke@microsoft.com> - 2026-06-24 09:23 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-24 13:10 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-06-24 11:18 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> - 2026-06-25 15:47 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> - 2026-06-22 08:57 +0000
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2026-06-21 07:31 +0100
Re: BBC cuts (round 1?) JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> - 2026-06-21 09:19 +0100
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 10:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n9ppsaFd54dU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #249446 |
David Wade wrote: > How is it copyright infringement? The BBC broadcast on Freesat, un- > encrypted, free-to-air. The Metro newspaper is given away free of charge in railway stations without needing any secret decoder ring to read it, does that make it non-copyright?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 11:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1118cqv$knm6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249451 |
On 21/06/2026 10:40, Andy Burns wrote: > David Wade wrote: > >> How is it copyright infringement? The BBC broadcast on Freesat, un- >> encrypted, free-to-air. > > The Metro newspaper is given away free of charge in railway stations > without needing any secret decoder ring to read it, does that make it > non-copyright? So I can receive a broadcast and watch it without breaching copyright, just as I can read the metro and take it to France an read it there without breaching copyright. What I can't do is copy articles from it and put them on Facebook, or post them on a French web site. If I were to re-broadcast the BBC then that would be breach of copyright, but receiving it via Freesat simply receives the original broadcast, and using a VPN simply routes the original data stream, its not copied so no how can that be breach of copyright? Dave
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 22:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n9odhaFn1kU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #249436 |
On 20/06/2026 14:37, David Wade wrote: > On 20/06/2026 10:58, Norman Wells wrote: >> On 20/06/2026 09:54, Scott wrote: >>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 20:30:27 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 19/06/2026 18:41, pinnerite wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 17:32:19 +0100 >>>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgmqrrlej5o> >>>>>> >>>>>> Several programmes axed, including Cross Incontinents. >>>>> >>>>> When I realised that BBC News feeds from their team Jerusalem were >>>>> indeed biased, I started watching alternatives and in particular >>>>> France24. Do I need a TV licence for that? >>>> >>>> Yes. It's a licence to receive television transmissions, not just >>>> BBC ones. >>> >>> Unless he lives in France :-) >> >> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. > > Can you explain which law is being broken? That depends on how he is viewing it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-22 12:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <g77i3ldkj03kaoe40rk6cf1onif0la5249@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #249428 |
On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 10:58:12 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >On 20/06/2026 09:54, Scott wrote: >> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 20:30:27 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> >> wrote: >> >>> On 19/06/2026 18:41, pinnerite wrote: >>>> On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 17:32:19 +0100 >>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgmqrrlej5o> >>>>> >>>>> Several programmes axed, including Cross Incontinents. >>>> >>>> When I realised that BBC News feeds from their team Jerusalem were >>>> indeed biased, I started watching alternatives and in particular >>>> France24. Do I need a TV licence for that? >>> >>> Yes. It's a licence to receive television transmissions, not just BBC ones. >> >> Unless he lives in France :-) > >In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. > >> On a more serious note, I see France has abolished the TV licence and >> broadcasting is funded from VAT. In Denmark it is funded through >> general taxation. I think we should abolish the TV licence and its >> administration and fund the BBC from general taxation. The idea that >> the licence fee guarantees the independence of the BBC is a complete >> myth as the Government sets the licence fee and the BBC has to >> maintain good relations with the Government, especially around Charter >> renewal time. > >I think that's been done to death here. I thought it might be of interest to someone if not you as the Charter renewal approaches.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 07:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bs8k3l1daors79fthfrscch9qn3e04baat@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #249470 |
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. > >I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law certainly has no jusidiction in France. Rod.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 09:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v9gk3ltttv77lelv73f60kku5ih2i9kb62@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #249494 |
On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott ><newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > >>>In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>>the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >> >>I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. > >It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >certainly has no jusidiction in France. What if you use a router at home? Could you be committing an offence in both jurisdictions :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 09:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n9uutsF6cchU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #249499 |
On 23/06/2026 09:19, Scott wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart > <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > >> On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott >> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >> >>>> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>>> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >>> >>> I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. >> >> It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >> French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >> certainly has no jusidiction in France. > > What if you use a router at home? In the UK, which this group concerns, You need a licence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 17:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bpbl3l9kr1ojpm1v36p4hau767oak8hga0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #249501 |
On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 09:37:15 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >On 23/06/2026 09:19, Scott wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart >> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott >>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>>> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>>>> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >>>> >>>> I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. >>> >>> It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >>> French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >>> certainly has no jusidiction in France. >> >> What if you use a router at home? > >In the UK, which this group concerns, You need a licence. > So if you login to your home broadband from France to watch TV in France you are committing an offence in the UK if you do not have a UK licence. What if you use VPN in France, would that be an offence also?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 17:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n9vqqbF6cchU8@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #249512 |
On 23/06/2026 17:11, Scott wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 09:37:15 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> > wrote: > >> On 23/06/2026 09:19, Scott wrote: >>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart >>> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott >>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>>>>> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >>>>> >>>>> I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. >>>> >>>> It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >>>> French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >>>> certainly has no jusidiction in France. >>> >>> What if you use a router at home? >> >> In the UK, which this group concerns, You need a licence. >> > So if you login to your home broadband from France to watch TV in > France you are committing an offence in the UK if you do not have a UK > licence. Yes. According to The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004: "'television receiver' means any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is installed or used for any other purpose". That reads on to the router. > What if you use VPN in France, would that be an offence also? The VPN server would have to be in the UK and would have to be licensed for it to be legal. I doubt if such a ruse actually works, but you may know different.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 20:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5snl3lh6hccd1flsmke6e7f852dleam682@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #249514 |
On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:33:14 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >On 23/06/2026 17:11, Scott wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 09:37:15 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> >> wrote: >> >>> On 23/06/2026 09:19, Scott wrote: >>>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart >>>> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott >>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>>>>>> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. >>>>> >>>>> It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >>>>> French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >>>>> certainly has no jusidiction in France. >>>> >>>> What if you use a router at home? >>> >>> In the UK, which this group concerns, You need a licence. >>> >> So if you login to your home broadband from France to watch TV in >> France you are committing an offence in the UK if you do not have a UK >> licence. > >Yes. According to The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations >2004: > >"'television receiver' means any apparatus installed or used for the >purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy >or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is >installed or used for any other purpose". > >That reads on to the router. Thanks. I think you are correct. IIRC in the old days the word 'establishing' was used, which would seem to cover the situation. > >> What if you use VPN in France, would that be an offence also? > >The VPN server would have to be in the UK and would have to be licensed >for it to be legal. I doubt if such a ruse actually works, but you may >know different. I thought some elements of the BBC recommended this to overcome the restrictions on BBC Sounds. I'll see if I can find more.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 20:57 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <111eog7$2gid4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249516 |
On 23/06/2026 20:36, Scott wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:33:14 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> > wrote: > >> On 23/06/2026 17:11, Scott wrote: >>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 09:37:15 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 23/06/2026 09:19, Scott wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart >>>>> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott >>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't watch >>>>>>>> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. >>>>>> >>>>>> It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >>>>>> French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >>>>>> certainly has no jusidiction in France. >>>>> >>>>> What if you use a router at home? >>>> >>>> In the UK, which this group concerns, You need a licence. >>>> >>> So if you login to your home broadband from France to watch TV in >>> France you are committing an offence in the UK if you do not have a UK >>> licence. >> >> Yes. According to The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations >> 2004: >> >> "'television receiver' means any apparatus installed or used for the >> purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy >> or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is >> installed or used for any other purpose". >> >> That reads on to the router. > > Thanks. I think you are correct. IIRC in the old days the word > 'establishing' was used, which would seem to cover the situation. >> >>> What if you use VPN in France, would that be an offence also? >> >> The VPN server would have to be in the UK and would have to be licensed >> for it to be legal. I doubt if such a ruse actually works, but you may >> know different. > so if i vpn through my home which has a tv licence, thats legal? > I thought some elements of the BBC recommended this to overcome the > restrictions on BBC Sounds. I'll see if I can find more. Dave
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-23 22:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <na0cmtF6cchU11@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #249517 |
On 23/06/2026 20:57, David Wade wrote: > On 23/06/2026 20:36, Scott wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:33:14 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> >> wrote: >> >>> On 23/06/2026 17:11, Scott wrote: >>>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 09:37:15 +0100, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 23/06/2026 09:19, Scott wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 07:14:17 +0100, Roderick Stewart >>>>>> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:33:30 +0100, Scott >>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In which case he'll probably be watching it illegally. I can't >>>>>>>>> watch >>>>>>>>> the BBC in France even though I have a TV licence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think you will find it is legal to watch France24 in France. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It might even be legal to watch the BBC in France. I don't know what >>>>>>> French law says about watching foreign programmes, but British law >>>>>>> certainly has no jusidiction in France. >>>>>> >>>>>> What if you use a router at home? >>>>> >>>>> In the UK, which this group concerns, You need a licence. >>>>> >>>> So if you login to your home broadband from France to watch TV in >>>> France you are committing an offence in the UK if you do not have a UK >>>> licence. >>> >>> Yes. According to The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations >>> 2004: >>> >>> "'television receiver' means any apparatus installed or used for the >>> purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy >>> or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is >>> installed or used for any other purpose". >>> >>> That reads on to the router. >> >> Thanks. I think you are correct. IIRC in the old days the word >> 'establishing' was used, which would seem to cover the situation. >>> >>>> What if you use VPN in France, would that be an offence also? >>> >>> The VPN server would have to be in the UK and would have to be licensed >>> for it to be legal. I doubt if such a ruse actually works, but you may >>> know different. >> > > so if i vpn through my home which has a tv licence, thats legal? I don't see why not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-24 06:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <111fp9f$2p1ij$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249517 |
On 23/06/2026 20:57, David Wade wrote: > > so if i vpn through my home which has a tv licence, thats legal? There were lots of hints that the Starmer regime was wanting to restrict the use of VPN but we have no idea what Bodybags will do when he takes over.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-24 09:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <111g397$2reqe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249519 |
On 24/06/2026 06:17, JMB99 wrote: > On 23/06/2026 20:57, David Wade wrote: >> >> so if i vpn through my home which has a tv licence, thats legal? > > > There were lots of hints that the Starmer regime was wanting to restrict > the use of VPN but we have no idea what Bodybags will do when he takes > over. > > Well yes, but how do you differ between legitimate use, for example to access my NAS when roaming, or to watch the BBC. Its the same VPN tunnel. Dave.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-24 10:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <111g83v$2t400$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249524 |
On 24/06/2026 09:08, David Wade wrote: > Well yes, but how do you differ between legitimate use, for example to > access my NAS when roaming, or to watch the BBC. Its the same VPN tunnel. The term VPN has been hijacked by a particular off label use of the underlying technology, to provide services to obscure the true identity of the end user. The use here is more like the on label use, to extend a LAN, whilst using the public internet to actually carry the traffic. The politicians are concerned about the off label use.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-24 13:04 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <111gh3p$2vmhl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249527 |
On 24/06/2026 10:30, David Woolley wrote: > On 24/06/2026 09:08, David Wade wrote: >> Well yes, but how do you differ between legitimate use, for example to >> access my NAS when roaming, or to watch the BBC. Its the same VPN tunnel. > > The term VPN has been hijacked by a particular off label use of the > underlying technology, to provide services to obscure the true identity > of the end user. The use here is more like the on label use, to extend > a LAN, whilst using the public internet to actually carry the traffic. > > The politicians are concerned about the off label use. I have found having a flexible VPN almost essential. When in Spain there are several UK NHS sites and apps that don't work without a VPN. When in the UK I can't use a couple of Spanish Government web sites, nor can I order a delivery from a couple Spanish Supermarkets. Also usefull for reading US newspapers.... Dave
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 12:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5cebdf916cbob@sick-of-spam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #249427 |
In article <k1lc3lpm1fnd33pgrfafq6ejntaleqoh5t@4ax.com>, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > I think we should abolish the TV licence and its > administration and fund the BBC from general taxation. As it stands, the BBC is a political activist organisation, it is a million miles from neutral. It lies directly and by omission about almost everything but most obviously, Climate, Israel, Trump and the Grooming gangs. In honesty, it's a disgrace and I'm ashamed of it. Why do you think that people who cannot stand the BBC and have more sense than to watch it, should be forced to pay for it? Having said that. My preferred option would be that the BBC stopped the wokery and the adolescent 6th form political position, grew up and stared to honour their charter by being truthful and once again earn the respect they once had before it was captured, wouldn't that be nice. Bob.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 17:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1116e6f$6i6g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249435 |
On 2026-06-20 12:14, Bob Latham wrote: > In article <k1lc3lpm1fnd33pgrfafq6ejntaleqoh5t@4ax.com>, > Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > >> I think we should abolish the TV licence and its >> administration and fund the BBC from general taxation. > > > As he bullshits, Bob LieToThem > is a political activist dis > organisation, he/she/it (delete the inapplicable) > is a > million miles from neutral. He/she/it (delete the inapplicable) > lies directly and by omission about > almost everything but most obviously, Climate, Israel, Trump and the > Grooming gangs. In honesty, it's a disgrace and I'm ashamed of it. Sadly, you show no sign of self-shame at all. > Why do you think that people who cannot stand the BBC and have more > sense than to watch it, should be forced to pay for it? [Different argument, not going to allow you to conflate the two by going there.] > Having said that. My preferred option would be that Bob Latham > stopped > the childish anti- > wokery and the adolescent 6th form political position, grew up > and started to behave as an adult who is > truthful and once again > earn the respect He/she/it (delete the inapplicable) > once had before He/she/it (delete the inapplicable) > was captured, wouldn't that > be nice. Roll on the day, or, seeing who it is who's writing this garbage, perhaps that should that be 'Troll on the day'. -- Fake news kills! I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 08:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <kd3f3l5emen9um88uufbo6e1gc9jp3kro5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #249435 |
On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 12:14:47 +0100, Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote: >Having said that. My preferred option would be that the BBC stopped >the wokery and the adolescent 6th form political position, grew up >and stared to honour their charter by being truthful and once again >earn the respect they once had before it was captured, wouldn't that >be nice. It's never going to do that as long as it has no real obligations towards those who pay for it. Businesses that are answerable by means of a financial obligation to provide what their customers can choose to pay for will have a strong incentive to provide what people actually want, whereas any organisation that is paid several billion a year regardless of what it does will simply do whatever it likes because it has no reason to care. There is no way the BBC can survive in its present form because it's not the 1950s any more. If it wants to survive at all, the one thing that absolutely *must* change is the mechanism by which it is paid for because it's not the 1950s any more. The BBC can no longer be regarded as an essential public service because it's now just one of many competing services all offering the same kind of thing because it's not the 1950s any more. Rod.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 09:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11187ad$lgp5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #249448 |
On 21/06/2026 08:26, Roderick Stewart wrote: > There is no way the BBC can survive in its present form because it's > not the 1950s any more. By that argument we could close all libraries and might as well close the universities as well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | uk.tech.digital-tv
csiph-web