Hacker News Reader

Comment by sbhn | Hacker News Reader

I kind of read the headline as, ‘pay the guardian a subscription fee or we’ll aggravate, and amplify, stories that make society feel more scared and under attack from forces that can only be resolved with less freedoms and more tax payer spending’.

Perhaps the guardian should lobby to make non payment of ‘subscription’ a criminal offence and benefit from the same protections over competition that are awarded the bbc news.

View on HN

That makes no sense. The Guardian is not a local newspaper, it wouldn't benefit from higher taxes, and you don't need a subscription to read the BBC news.

I try to put as much information into a small amount text so it’s quick for you to read. I don’t need to write a 20 page essay to convince you. But I’ll give you a few points. The guardian is just another lobby with its own hopes and fears, but trying to convert all its readers to a subscription model, and it will use any click bait title and print any fud it can to convince you of the virtues of the subscription model. The bbc license fee, is illegal in England not to pay. The terms and conditions on license fee renewal cover all forms of media distribution and ways you might consume bbc content. And it’s illegal to reprint those terms and conditions in any other media format available so I can’t copy and paste it here for you. 50 percent of the criminals that pass through a British councils court houses, are there for non payment of bbc license fee. I get this info from my local paper public notices section. The bbc license fee creates a unlevel playing field for all other media organisations which who have media business models similar to the many media types the bbc produces. Bbc gets its money for free, many people, especially poor, receive criminal convictions for not paying it, it creates an anti competitive environment for competing media organisations, it’s lawyers are the best. At least local news outlets can print all the court cases it wins, if it’s still legal to. I heard that recently many more criminal convictions, let alone suspect investigations, are now subject to gag orders. This is England

Ok so...

There's no "BBC fee". Theres a TV Licence fee.

You don't need to pay it if you don't own a tv. Or you own a tv hooked up to a playstation. There's also many other (legal) reasons to not pay for it.

There's no such thing as a "british council court house". There's magistrates court, where non-payment of the license fee might end up at.

"50 percent of the criminals that pass through a British councils court houses, are there for non payment of bbc license fee" is a ridiculous statement. It's closer to 1 in 10, a fact you could have discovered by a simple google search. You can find a related article here: https://fullfact.org/news/do-tv-licence-offences-account-one...

A criminal conviction for non payment of the tv license fee will not show up in most checks, and you don't have to disclose it.

Every single thing you typed above is either completely incorrect, or specifically misleading.

So 10 percent of criminal convictions are bbc license fee related, and many don’t show up in searches or make it far enough to be statutorily documented. I’m really sorry I wrote the British court house thing, you see, I don’t need to speak the queens english, or write within the constraints of proper journalist standards to convey an idea in a small text field on a public forum. Unless of course the law has changed, and the system needs justify its existence with more examples victimless petty crime. Did you understand my concept of what the bbc license fee protects.

The naming of the license as ‘TV license’ is extremely, deliberately and specifically misleading.

You don't need to speak good English to convince people on this forum, but you do need to be able to back up your ideas with evidence. I do have sympathy with arguments against the BBC license fee and subscription models, but the fact that you pull exaggerated figures from the top of your head to support your arguments does very little for you.

You just broke the law of my second disagreer. It’s ‘TV license’, not ‘BBC license’, seems you're no better than me or perhaps been a little misinformed by its naming, just like just about everybody, except those who read and understood it’s terms and conditions.

I call the tv licence, the communications license, but in order to maintain a little obfuscation if it’s real purpose to the general public, you could name it the ‘BCC License’ - British Compulsory Communications License. Where You would have no right to communicate unless you ticked the box, right before payment, that shows you understood the t&cs.

You can use almost all media and communications services without paying the license fee, including browsing the internet (even the BBC news website!), watching catch-up TV (except BBC iPlayer) and using a TV to play computer games, watch DVDs or listen to digital radio.

You only need to pay the license fee if you watch live television or, more recently, BBC iPlayer. I know this because I went for many years without paying the fee, legally and guilt-free.

I’m sorry but there is no get out clause in today’s modern society when it comes to paying the tv license fee, unless your over 65 or registered unemployed. The magistrate is going to need full access to your private communications to find any evidence of you flouting the tv licensing laws so they can decide if you are guilty or not. Sending someone around to your house at night to look through your window and see what that strange flashing glow is, is just too old fashioned.

You can get out of paying the license fee by not watching live television or BBC iPlayer. I know a lot of people that do this without any problems.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com