Is it illegal to plug in a device to watch BBC iPlayer or Live TV in Starbucks? | Hacker News Reader

Is it illegal to plug in a device to watch BBC iPlayer or Live TV in Starbucks?

law.stackexchange.com

66 pointsjosephcsible34 comments

> However, if you’re away from home and plug one of these devices into the mains and use it to watch live on any channel, TV service or streaming service, or use BBC iPlayer*, you need to be covered by a separate TV Licence at that address

It always amazes me how absurd laws can be (assuming that is an accurate interpretation of the law)

It sounds absurd, but I can kind of see how it would happen. My guess is that the laws for TV licenses were written before smart phones were a thing. These laws probably have some definition of what a TV like "a screen plugged into a power outlet that can receive live, over the air video" and a smart phone happens to meet that definition when it's plugged in. It takes time and effort to update these laws and no one actually cares enough to do it. Some lawyer at Starbucks noticed this quirk and is covering the companies ass, but at the end of the day, no one actually gives a shit.

> My guess is that the laws for TV licenses were written before smart phones were a thing.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/part/4/2022-06-... Communications Act 2003

The legislation hinges on the definition of a TV Receiver.

368Meanings of “television receiver” and “use” (1)In this Part “television receiver” means any apparatus of a description specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State setting out the descriptions of apparatus that are to be television receivers for the purposes of this Part. (2)Regulations under this section defining a television receiver may provide for references to such a receiver to include references to software used in association with apparatus. [F9(3)References in this Part to using a television receiver are references to using it for— (a)receiving all or any part of any television programme, or (b)receiving all or any part of a programme included in an on-demand programme service which is provided by the BBC,and that reference to the provision of an on-demand programme service by the BBC is to be read in accordance with section 368R(5) and (6).] (4)The power to make regulations under this section defining a television receiver includes power to modify subsection (3).

Some businesses dont want the aggravation from the state.

However this is where it gets interesting, my interpretation of this law would mean every laptop, tablet and smartphone would need a tv licence if a UK resident and without a tv licence you cant even stream live events off streaming services like Youtube.

The BBC also have the legal right to spy on you, in the same way utility companies can without court orders, even tax inspectors have more rights to spy than the police, so considering the BBC journalistic endeavours, this unlegislated right to keep journalist sources secret even from courts, have the BBC got a state legislated licence to hack the world?

I'll probably get more hassle on the street for this comment from those around me for pointing the above out.

PR goes a long way.

The absurdity is more that even if you watch a channel broadcast on YouTube you still need to pay. Even if the channel is from some other country, you pay to fund the BBC (which is biased against that country in its reports no less)

This post would make more sense if you named the station. There is absurdity in being obliged to pay the BBC so you can watch CNA Singapore streamed on YouTube.

I doubt you were referring to CNA specifically, just picking an example of live TV on YouTube.

Any live content online, whether it’s Youtube Live or Twitch or anything else, requires a TV license, so long as it’s a “television programme service”. This is vaguely clarified to depend on: - Whether a service has a regular schedule of programmes - How continuous a service is Editorial control and consistency - The quality of production and editorial values.

(source https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/do-i-need-a-tv-licence-twitch-...)

So I imagine most Youtube/Twitch indie content wouldn’t count, but any foreign TV broadcast would. It’s ridiculous.

This looks like something you would read in Talmud.

If someone who does have a tv license for the building plugs yours in for you, it’s okay as well. But they must also unplug it when you leave.

So you can charge on mains, as long as you watch on battery? What if you use a wireless charger while watching? Does that count as connected?

Yes. Unless you’re on transportation.

Also a useful loophole to get around the license required to sell alcohol, as demonstrated by Tom Scott in a hovercraft: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLF7yife8YE

Or for that matter, how about a human-powered charger, or even a device powered by its own nuclear energy source[1]?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_ge...

Bring a rechargeable battery with you, plug that into a charger on the wall, and plug the phone into another port of the battery.

This was how students could get away with live streaming when I was at university. Back then iPlayer didn’t require a TV license at all for on-demand. [0]

[0]- https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tv-licence-iplayer-sept-1

A lot of commenters seen to be missing that the question is being asked with reference to a Starbucks in France.

iPlayer applies geofencing comparable to many other streaming services. Yes they pursue people in the UK regarding watching without a licence. No I've never heard of them extraditing people from other countries for breaking a UK specific law. Bear in mind that you can't get a TV licence for outside the UK. I struggle to see how that would work. My guess is that this is a Starbucks specific rule.

One interesting aspect of the OP is the question asker was in France, not the UK.

Most likely starbucks just using a blanket/global terms and conditions document but still, interesting use of the word "unlawful"

Imagine enforcing that law

Why don’t Starbucks just block the traffic on that IP?

Why should they have to? And what's to stop the customer using their own data anyway? Unlimited data plans are common in the UK.

Why should they have to? They shouldn’t ideally but the law is what it is. Their reactions was T&Cs but holing up an IP is an automated solution that is more robust.

The customer can use their own data - if they are liable in that scenario it would be nuts. But maybe that is the legal position?

The law doesn't say they have to help enforce the law. It would be the customer who's breaking the law by watching TV, not them.

My hunch would be that no TV Licencing enforcement teams will be sent to patrol coffee shops and so we will never see a test case.

They don't want to inconvenience their customers, and that would be too wide of a block.

Because traffic on that IP is legal if the phone is on battery power. Seriously, I did not make this up, it's on the linked page.

TV in the UK is weird. They drive up and down the streets scanning for CRT TVs RF signals and extort homeowners for "taxes".

No they don't, they use the database of license holders to find addresses of those without a license. CRT detection was stopped in the sixties and there's some evidence that the "Detector Vans" were mainly tactics to scare people without licenses into getting one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_detector_van

Well, it also doesn't help that you can't buy a CRT TV anymore, but I digress.

Not really relevant if they stopped doing it decades before flatscreen TVs became available.

Is this one of those laws that's there just to exist but people don't actually follow it? Like torrenting is illegal in India but people still torrent.

These people send enforcers to homes.

Worth noting that these "enforcers" have absolutely zero legal powers. You can just tell them to go away and shut the door.

They rely on intimidation and confusion about their legal powers to trick people.

Yeah and they prey on elderly mainly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com