[wac]

I felt like this for years- annoyed at the insistence that I pay the fee even though I don't own a TV. Then, in a moment of inspiration, I took 2 minutes to fill out the online form and haven't been bothered since.

However, the BBC offers quality TV without the even greater annoyance of incessant commercials. Take the Olympics: NBC was criticised for their delayed and edited broadcast while the BBC broadcast nearly all events live (some 20+ channels) and without any commercial breaks.

Unfortunately, we can't have commercial free TV without the fee.

[takluyver]

And even without paying the fee, we get the BBC website, podcasts, the last week of programmes on demand (iPlayer), several national and many local radio stations.

No doubt the enforcement system could be tweaked a bit to improve it, but the results are more than worth the inconvenience.

[freehunter]

My question would be, how would they know you don't have a TV if you don't tell them? Calling it hate mail and taking the time to return to sender like the OP is just making life hateful for yourself.

[lutusp]

> My question would be, how would they know you don't have a TV if you don't tell them?

You may find this hard to believe, but they drive around in a high-tech van and monitor the kinds of signals that emanate from a TV set. If they detect the electronic signature of a TV set emanating from a house paying no license fee, or if they see an off-air antenna, they begin legal proceedings.

What I said above was easier in the old days of television, where a vacuum picture tube require 50 watts of power just to sweep an electronic beam across the face of the tube (and produced its own telltale electromagnetic field). But it's still quite feasible from a technical standpoint -- a picture and explanation of one of the vans:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_Uni...

[jlgreco]

The principle behind their operation is reasonable, basically just regular old Van Eck phreaking.

However I thought the general consensus is that they do not actually do this, and that it is simply a rather useful myth.

[lutusp]

> However I thought the general consensus is that they do not actually do this, and that it is simply a rather useful myth.

Agreed. I would guess the most economical thing to do is publish pictures of the van online and describe its features. Actually driving it around is probably not nearly as cost-effective.

[Lockyy]

Which is unfortunate if you have a TV but don't pay the fee because you don't have to.

You only have to pay if you watch "live TV." (Any live TV at all that is, streaming content as it is aired from the us still requires a TV license.) However, owning a TV in itself does not require a license. Games consoles, Netflix and DVDs do not mean that you require a license because none of these are you watching TV as it is broadcast.

Edit: As a note, I have a TV, I do watch live TV and I do have a license. However, when I first moved into my own place I did get some of the letters demanding payment unless I wanted legal proceedings to begin. But they stopped once I phoned up and told them I didn't have a TV, didn't intend to get one soon and wouldn't be paying.

[earnubs]

How did you watch the Olympics?