Scrap the TV licence

Originally posted by Johnmb
With todays tecnology, it is easy to control who watches what. RTE could easily be coded, and a decoder provided cheaply in return for paying the licence fee. Those that don't pay, can't see. Simple. Or, as someone said previously, a blocker could easily be fitted to the TVs of those who decide to opt-out of the licence fee regime.

Actually,I'd reckon that such technology will be used in future to block all television if there is no electronic record of a licence having been paid.
That will become possible after analog shut down which is still at least ten years away.

Redleslie2

Originally posted by Johnmb
Not flustered, I just find it comical that you think anyone could take you seriously when you tell them that "John Byrne" did something.

And I find it comical that you believe that you can't be traced by state agencies just because you may not be in the phone book and because your name is fairly common or because inspectors just couldn't be bothered doing their jobs.

cruiserweight

Originally posted by Johnmb
It depends which option you are going for. If it is the decoder option, they the people who want it pay for it (as is done with subscription channels now). If it is the blocker option, the the people getting it fitted make the one off payment (new TVs will come with the option of having them pre-fitted, thereby not requiring your name/address to be supplied when purchasing).

So in option one you are penalised for abiding by the law. as for option two I am sure that people will remove blockers.

Since when do you have to provide your name and address when buying a telly?

Hobbes

Originally posted by Macros42
What if I ony want the TV to play X-Box games? Or just to watch DVDs? Let's say I get rid of cable (already done), cancel my Sky sub, never get an aerial - should I still pay for the service?

A friend of mine some years back got out of not having to pay the fee while having a TV. He used it only for the computer. Inspectors checked him out and all.

They should remove the license fee, or remove the option not to get RTE if you don't want to pay it. I can't remember the last time I watched Irish stations, yet I have to pay???

One thing gets me though is how anal RTE are in collecting it. A company I worked for a long time ago brought some heads from RTE to give a tour of the company/factory. There were some areas they were not allowed go so they had a TV demonstration of the areas in the conference room. Two weeks later the company got sent a TV licence summons.

Johnmb

Originally posted by Redleslie2
And I find it comical that you believe that you can't be traced by state agencies just because you may not be in the phone book and because your name is fairly common or because inspectors just couldn't be bothered doing their jobs.

The phone book is just an example. How can the state agency trace me? Do you really think that they are going to look up every John Byrne that there is, and ask "Are you the one Redleslie2 was talking about"? You might as well phone the Gardai and tell them that Paddy was speeding.

halkar

I still think RTE should come FTA like BBCs did so we can get quality reception with small dishes without having to pay SKY and NTL for it. Then I know I am getting value for money. I know many people have SKY and most of the time they only watch Irish channels. 99% channels on SKY are rubbish anyway

Redleslie2

Originally posted by Johnmb
The phone book is just an example. How can the state agency trace me? Do you really think that they are going to look up every John Byrne that there is, and ask "Are you the one Redleslie2 was talking about"? You might as well phone the Gardai and tell them that Paddy was speeding.

You are John M Byrne, a self-employed accountant with this website and you post here so your IP may be traceable. That should be more than enough to get any sponger checked out.

Johnmb

Originally posted by Redleslie2
You are John M Byrne, a self-employed accountant with this website and you post here so your IP may be traceable. That should be more than enough to get any sponger checked out.

ROTFLMAO. I'm not a self employed accountant BTW. As for tracing the IP address, or tracing the owner of the website you linked to, they'd need justifiable reason, and a court order, before anybody can release those records. Your word counts for nothing in that regard. My post states quite clearly that I have a licence (it doesn't matter that I didn't pay for it). So they are stuck. They could start looking up every John Byrne (the "M" is irrelevant, as I have never used it on anything that they would be able to access), but in all likelihood they will just ignore you and hope that if I haven't got a licence they will find me during their normal investigations. As I said earlier though, when I stop having a licence, they shouldn't have any problems finding me, between NTL, Sky, and a satelite dish on the front of a house which hasn't renewed its licence.

Hobbes

If they wanted to find you, they can just use a detector van.

Johnmb

Originally posted by Hobbes
If they wanted to find you, they can just use a detector van.

Exactly what I've been saying. Someone giving them a name, and nothing more, is no good to them, especially when it is such a common name.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Redleslie2

The cops were able to track down a guy who was stupid enough to tell me about some bold illegal stuff he was into after I gave them his name and nothing more. Finding spongers is probably not much different. The self-orbiting Mr.Byrne here may or may not be a sponger but he sounds like someone who needs to be taken down a peg or two anyway.

Johnmb

Originally posted by Redleslie2
The cops were able to track down a guy who was stupid enough to tell me about some bold illegal stuff he was into after I gave them his name and nothing more. Finding spongers is probably not much different. The self-orbiting Mr.Byrne here may or may not be a sponger but he sounds like someone who needs to be taken down a peg or two anyway.

Well, you'll have to do better than that to take me down. It is a fairly simple concept, the inspectors are not going to drop their normal work to check out every John Byrne in Dublin, no matter how important you think you are. Privacy laws stop them from tracing me via my website, and I wouldn't hesitate to sue IOL if they illegally gave out my details. Even if they were daft enough to believe you without checking into where you got your "information", they'd still just go about their normal routines and trust that they'll eventually get around to me. Be thankful that the licence inspectors are not the Gardai, as otherwise you would risk being charged with wasting police time by making unsupported claims. In fact, if you did make any accusations to the inspectors about me, I may have a case for harrassment against you.

sceptre

Originally posted by Redleslie2
The self-orbiting Mr.Byrne here may or may not be a sponger but he sounds like someone who needs to be taken down a peg or two anyway.

So you're hoping to waste someone's time by attempting to get someone chasing after someone who says he has a TV licence that covers his home? Have fun with that.

de5p0i1er

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I can live without the dole I consider it essential that a service be made available to the Irish people which has Irish programming, educational programming etc. I consider the Tv MORE ESSENTIAL than the DOLE. I consider it a lot more essential than the luxury of some students getting the dole, rent and a cash in hand job.I mean get a job FFS. I absolutely love Pat Kenny and couldnt live without him so again the dole is not essential to ME. Why should I pay?

Lets see how long you would last without the Dole if you were out off work for a few months and the bills started piling up. People need money to live the don't need RTE, They pay the likes of Pat Kenny way to much money and we don't get a say in that. The only good shows they have are importedand can be seen on Sky, I don't bother with RTE anymore since I got a satelite dish. Why should I pay for something I don't use.

arcadegame2004

I would abolosh the TV license because it is against fair competition. RTE's financial woes demonstrate my consistent belief over the years that semi-states are usually inefficient because of years of experience of being bailed out by taxpayer's cash injections.

Let them depend on advertising-revenue. The more popular the programmes they produce the greater that revenue will be.

Originally posted by arcadegame2004

Let them depend on advertising-revenue. The more popular the programmes they produce the greater that revenue will be.

And where would they get the money on this small island to produce these programmes?
There simply isn't the audience/advertising revenue on this island to make these programmes without outside funding such as the licence fee.
Without it the majority of programming would be foreign.
You would end up with four tv3's...
yuck

GoneShootin

Who needs TVs anyway. The Internet is where its at !

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

PBC_1966

Originally posted by Macros42:
That was in England iirc. A guy only used his TV for watching videos and got away without paying the fee. The law is different here - any equipment capable of receiving a telegraphic signal is chargeable.

For your information, the law here in Britain requires a license to receive any TV broadcast which originates from or is controlled from within the U.K.

So for watching terrestrial U.K. broadcasts of BBC or ITV, a license is required. To watch Sky channels on satellite, controlled from the U.K., requires a license.

To view RTE from across the border, or to watch non-U.K. satellite channels does not require a license.

Tommy Vercetti

Originally posted by Redleslie2
The cops were able to track down a guy who was stupid enough to tell me about some bold illegal stuff he was into after I gave them his name and nothing more. Finding spongers is probably not much different. The self-orbiting Mr.Byrne here may or may not be a sponger but he sounds like someone who needs to be taken down a peg or two anyway.

*yawn* look, I'll buy johnmb a poxy TV licence if you just stfu


anyhoo i agree in principle with the concept of the TV licence, however unfair and anti-competition it may be, but I believe that RTE needs to be dragged into this century

also I recall reading about a court case years ago where someone who lived in a valley in the arse end of nowhere (in Ireland) proved in court that he could not receive a signal and that his TV was only used for videos and was thus cleared of the charges of not having a licence, I've no idea if there is any evidence of this on tinternet, but I vaguely recall reading about the case....

arcadegame2004

Well if the advertising revenue isn't sufficient then I would propose dividing the license-fee revenues equally between Irish TV Channels. It just isn't on for RTE to get a state-subsidy which discriminates against everyone else.

Zombrex

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Well if the advertising revenue isn't sufficient then I would propose dividing the license-fee revenues equally between Irish TV Channels. It just isn't on for RTE to get a state-subsidy which discriminates against everyone else.

But TV3 isn't a state broadcaster, and I don't think they would want to be one ... they don't want to be a station that has to provide unprofitable issue lead television for the public. They want to be Sky One (ie crap programs produced at low cost to maximise profits).

Nietzschean

i don't agree with that arguement that the reason we have ads on rte is because its a smaller pot and all that.

if they can't afford more programming don't show it, i'd rather have 6hrs a day of proper irish broadcasting. Show's like primetime/questions and answers provide a public service i don't see how fair city is one, malcom in the middle is hardly irish broadcasting.

fair city is irish broadcasting, but its hardly a public service its not designed to appeal to the entire country and provides no tangeable benefits, you wouldn't see the bbc funding cornation street.

if they showed 2 decent show's a day i wouldn't mind paying a tv licence, i'd actually much rather if i paid my tv licence to the uk gov and they broadcast the bbc here terrestrial. In this day in age we could easily have bbc ireland, they have an ulster, just have the irish stuff put in. I'd rather our funding went to that instead of duplicateing news and so on, the bbc documentarys are much better public service to be funding than fair city.

halkar

Originally posted by Tommy Vercetti
...
also I recall reading about a court case years ago where someone who lived in a valley in the arse end of nowhere (in Ireland) proved in court that he could not receive a signal and that his TV was only used for videos and was thus cleared of the charges of not having a licence, I've no idea if there is any evidence of this on tinternet, but I vaguely recall reading about the case....

that is serious, then, even if you get reception but not watch it, you shouldn't have to pay the license fee. You can have tv for sattelite, dvd, video or gaming and in this case it is like buying an Xbox but not paying Xbox license Why pay license if one doesn't watch RTE?
Though I am still in favour of paying the license and having RTE upgraded to digital to be put on FTA on sattelites and so I can kick the sky's @ss

gurramok

Originally posted by arcadegame2004

Let them depend on advertising-revenue. The more popular the programmes they produce the greater that revenue will be.

Agreed.

If you don't wanna watch RTE EVER and want to watch a non-rte channel, you should not have to pay the stealth tax.

Rte getting ad revenue as well as fee revenue is robbery of public finances without the balaclavas, if TV3 can survive, why not rte ?

The increases in the licence fee over the last 2 yrs justifies evading it in my opinion.
Some here say a majority supports it...on what prrof...why dont we have a referendum\zillion polls to decide if its needed or not?
In Holland the 'national broadcasting tax' is taken from your wages to support the national station with no ads rather than having a 'licence fee'

If the fee applies to a tv and/or receiver equipment, surely there are many boardsters here who own more than one tv and must pay the licence fee for the extra tv's in their homes??

de5p0i1er

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Let them depend on advertising-revenue. The more popular the programmes they produce the greater that revenue will be.

Agreed. Mabye then they'll think about getting some talented ppl on the television instead of git's like Pat Kenny & The cast of Fair City. There cost's would be a lot lower then it is now if they got rid of all these Directors that get a six figure salery for doing nothing and only got there job's because they know somebody who used to be a T.D.

SCULLY

Originally posted by Serialkiller
i don't agree with that arguement that the reason we have ads on rte is because its a smaller pot and all that.

if they can't afford more programming don't show it, i'd rather have 6hrs a day of proper irish broadcasting. Show's like primetime/questions and answers provide a public service i don't see how fair city is one, malcom in the middle is hardly irish broadcasting.

fair city is irish broadcasting, but its hardly a public service its not designed to appeal to the entire country and provides no tangeable benefits, you wouldn't see the bbc funding cornation street.

if they showed 2 decent show's a day i wouldn't mind paying a tv licence, i'd actually much rather if i paid my tv licence to the uk gov and they broadcast the bbc here terrestrial. In this day in age we could easily have bbc ireland, they have an ulster, just have the irish stuff put in. I'd rather our funding went to that instead of duplicateing news and so on, the bbc documentarys are much better public service to be funding than fair city.

While I think Fair City is quite poor a huge amount of people watrch it on a regular basis - therefore it does provide a public service. You should also define what you mean by 'proper irish broadcasting'. While primetime and q&a are good productions they also are not 'designed to appeal to the entire country ' - what program is.

'you wouldn't see the bbc funding cornation street.' No - they fund Eastenders.

A lot of people would gladly have RTE show less (or no) sport and increase the programs like Fair City. The problem RTE has is getting a correct balance. BTW I think that the licence fee is too much but is a necessary evil.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Serialkiller
I'd rather our funding went to that instead of duplicateing news and so on, the bbc documentarys are much better public service to be funding than fair city.

Even on RTE if a entertainment show such as Fair City is un-popular ratingswise, then it is axed. Fair City is very popular. Just because you think it is crap doesn't mean no one should watch it. I think the entire Sky One line up is crap, doesn't mean it isn't popular

Nietzschean

if its profitable then seperate it out, show it on tv3..i do believe they are interested in profit , i don't need to see that or any other 'entertainment' show's on the national broadcaster tbh

As its stands i'm paying the cast of fair city which isn't right imo, i've no problem paying for news/nationwide or anything else like that...but all others should just be axe'd...