10 ms·

BBC uses RIPA terrorism laws to catch TV licence fee dodgers in Northern Ireland

226 points by k-mcgrady 12y ago

blueflow 12y ago
Im not much surprised. A lot of people told that things like this will happen.
rmc 12y ago
It's not like there's a history of state abuses in Northern Ireland "to combat terrorism"....
k-mcgrady 12y ago
Honestly I'm not surprised and I don't think it'll change now that it's been exposed. It's a good example how these powers can be abused for idiotic reasons and why we need to be wary of them.
tempodox 12y ago
A perfect example of bad cases making bad law and bad law then being abused. British truants and TV watchers alike now have the honour of being treated as terrorists. The fact that it's not some overreaching surveillance body, but a pedestrian mob like the BBC who is abusing this law so blatantly, shows how badly made this law really is. Obviously, it has no safeguards against this kind of misuse. The “lawmakers” who built this travesty should be sent back to primary school.
- spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
  Many peopel might not know that the IRA bad lands (think steve earls copperhead road) where no go areas for quiet a few "crown servants" such as the BBC and The revenue man Arently a substatial minority of NI poluation where some what shocked post good friday when they where told "ah you have to start paying like every one else now"
  - FoxNewsFacts 12y ago
    North Ireland is a no-go zone where Muslims and IRA keep police away. -FoxNewsFacts
    - spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
      Apart from the Nice man from the Eu with the CAP monney nudge nudge wink
      - spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
        hmm PIRA sympathizers and French Farmers on HN who Knew :-)
- dingaling 12y ago
  > British truants and TV watchers alike now have the honour of being treated as terrorists. RIPA was never about 'terrorists'. It was designed to harmonise access to investigative information across Government-affiliated organisations, including local authorities. 'Harmonise' in this context of course meant 'grant full privileges', usually only requiring the head of the organisation to sign-off. Very occasionally would the Secretary of State have to be bothered. The use of RIPA by the BBC, for example, is not a surprise, it was a scenario foreseen during the consultation period. But the bill was not modified, because that was the intent. Source: I provided input as part of informal groups during RIPA consultation.
wmt 12y ago
Strange it's news now, as BBC has been already pretty openly abusing the spirit of the RIPA legislation to hunt down petty fee dodgers. Here's a word from the BBC from 2012: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/how-does-the-bbc-use-ripa http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/how-does-the-bb...
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  It's probably a New Year thing - the TVL people can I imagine more likely win people over to buying a license at New Year when people are thinking more towards being forthright and honest as they set plans for self-improvement??
jayess 12y ago
For those of us outside the UK, they are required to pay for a license when they own a TV and watch live television. It's about $215 a year. http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology--devices-and-online-top8?WT.ac=home_plt_technology http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/te...
- hackerboos 12y ago
  It's currently a criminal offense to watch broadcast TV in your home without one. There is legislation moving through parliament to make this a civil offense as magistrate courts are swamped with these cases. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/24/in-court-non-payment-tv-licence-television-desperate-cases http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/24/in-court-non-...
  - nmeofthestate 12y ago
    It's an offense to watch or record transmitted television stations in your home without a TV license. But it's perfectly legal to own a TV and use the on-demand portions of iPlayer (everything apart from viewing the currently-being-broadcast channel streams), Netflix, Google Play, 4od, Demand 5, DVDs, Blurays, etc etc. This is what I do. The TV Licensing website has a page where you can provide them with your reasons for not owning a TV license. This page explains (implicitly) all the things you can do sans license. And, hopefully, filling this in makes them less likely to pester you (I haven't had any contact from the licensing people). Here is the text from TV Licensing: You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder. Note how the second sentence arguably introduces confusion. You don't need a license if you use a computer but don't "Watch or record TV as it's being broadcast".
    - tomp 12y ago
      Wait, I can't quite parse your last statement... is it legal to watch BBC on demand and Netflix/DVDs without a licence, or not? (I suspect the former, but then I know nothing about this law.)
pjc50 12y ago
"The BBC declined to give any details about its use of RIPA" Nothing like transparency. The rest of the article strongly suggests this is to do with the detector vans. This is partially confirmed by a FOI query: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/prosecutions_from_television_det https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/prosecutions_from_tel... It sounds like everyone in authority believes that the use of detector vans is regulated by RIPA. I think this is due to section 2: (2)For the purposes of this Act, but subject to the following provisions of this section, a person intercepts a communication in the course of its transmission by means of a telecommunication system if, and only if, he— (a)so modifies or interferes with the system, or its operation, (b)so monitors transmissions made by means of the system, or (c)so monitors transmissions made by wireless telegraphy to or from apparatus comprised in the system, as to make some or all of the contents of the communication available, while being transmitted, to a person other than the sender or intended recipient of the communication. The detector vans are rumored to work by picking up the IF of the TV's heterodyne receiver. I guess this counts as "interception" of a signal, even though it's a signal that was publicly broadcast in the first place. This could all be cleared up by a clear statement from someone about what surveillance is taking place, but of course everyone loves secrecy and there's no honesty in public debate.
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  >The BBC declined to give any details about its use of RIPA. It argued that "maintaining uncertainty" about enforcement practices was part of its strategy to keep evasion to a minimum. // Hmm. On a side note where I work we used to get calls from the music licensing authorities, I always thought they just wanted to listen for background sounds so they could send in enforcers to fine us. I wonder if the BBC are doing that (perhaps buying recorded calls from marketeers, or such, and parsing for TV sounds??) - that would fall in to intercepting communications I feel.
  - nitrogen 12y ago
    Has anybody ever reverse engineered the Nielsen (or the UK equivalent) audio watermarking codes that their automated survey apps rely on to record what shows and ads are viewed, and when (DVR)?
noonespecial 12y ago
I think maybe "terrorism" is just the new term for crime of all levels now. Because crime makes people afraid right? Perhaps I'm terrified that if too many of those rotten tax dodgers skip out on thier tv tax there might not be another season of Doctor Who. Scary stuff.
- cm2187 12y ago
  There is a useful guide for this: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2013/11/Terrorist-chart.jpg http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303...
ha292 12y ago
Let us pause for a second an think what could possibly happen with anti-terrorism laws like this in not-so-advanced democracies where there is little protection of the average citizen from the abuse of state power. Let us also think about how the leading democracies export the "democratic software" (laws) and they get copied/cited in not-so-advanced democracies in making their own laws. It is very easy for a barely-democratic state to cite a western democracy's law as a precedence. Let us then think about how many people live under democratic laws (and under strong rule of law) and compare that to the number of people without that. Depressing. I fear that these badly written anti-terrorism laws are like software flaws that will flow from system to system and harm many more people than we can see right now.
- happyscrappy 12y ago
  This is kind of an odd case though, where they are charging for a broadcasted signal. Does this happen in other countries?
  - vidarh 12y ago
    A lot of European countries have license fees to cover public broadcasting.
  - rmc 12y ago
    Yes, public service television & radio funded by a tax on all TV owning households is common.
  - silentmars 12y ago
    Yes. Germany, for instance, has a similar system where you pay per TV.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- rmc 12y ago
  > anti-terrorism laws like this in not-so-advanced democracies where there is little protection of the average citizen from the abuse of state power. Ummm... This is about Northern Ireland, which had an undeclared low simmering civil war for much of the late 20th century, with abuses by state powers (imprisonment without trail, soliders shooting protesters on the streets), active paramilitary groups killing civilians and state actors, and undemocratic processes (gerrymandering of votes). I think we know what happens when the UK/NI state wants to abuse one part of the population.
vidarh 12y ago
From the sounds of it ("detection equipment") this appears to be the use of detection vans that was done for decades prior to RIPA, but that now is being done subject to RIPA because RIPA covers that activity. RIPA is an awful, awful law for a lot of reasons, but the article seems to sensationalise it in that RIPA does not appear to have suddenly allowed the BBC (or rather TV Licensing, which is a separate organization) to do something they weren't allowed to do before in this case (unless something much worse is hidden behind the "detection equipment" name).
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  It could be other things. They maybe are asking ISPs to look for packets related to live viewing of TV over the internet, that seems to fit the RIPA descriptions too. Indeed I'd be surprised if Capita weren't doing/looking to do that as they could potentially find lots of people to send nastygrams to that way.
jacquesm 12y ago
Aren't compulsory fees to support local broadcasters a bit out-dated? (Regardless of the blatant abuse of the law here.)
- TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
  They're very common in Europe and Africa.
- djhworld 12y ago
  it depends really, do you want your broadcaster to be answerable to the market? one of the strongest arguments for the BBC is it's under no obligation to meet any commercial or state interests. Some people may beg to differ on that viewpoint, but the BBC is generally highly regarded in the UK and abroad, especially for its news coverage If the license fee didn't exist then the BBC would have to make programmes that satisfy the mainstream, which is usually the lowest common denominator.
  - gaius 12y ago
    It's kinda like using the National Lottery to support niche interests like opera. A trick to get the unwashed masses to subsidise the toffs.
squozzer 12y ago
The BBC has dragged Western Civilization to a new low. Certainly not the finest hour in the long history of the British Empire, is it?
ingler 12y ago
I haven't seen van Eck phreaking[0] or Tempest[1] mentioned yet. Not that the BBC would use the tech, but it seems pertinent. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_phreaking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_phreaking [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename)
- DanBC 12y ago
  It's exactly what the "detector vans" claim to use.
  - AlyssaRowan 12y ago
    They used to have some of that equipment. Amongst other things, looking for 15625Hz spikes (from the horizontal frequency of PAL CRTs). I think they phased it out in the mid-80s, or at least stopped replacing the parts when they stopped working, so there very probably isn't any working equipment left now—that's my impression, at least. Since then it's gradually phased over to essentially SELECT address FROM addresses WHERE residential=1 AND tv_licence=0; now, with a side-order of retailers reporting the addresses of people who've bought TVs (so if you bought a TV, but not a TV licence, you're probably going to get a letter, and probably thereafter a visit).
    - DanBC 12y ago
      People who sell television equipment have to, by law, ask you for your name and address and pass it on to TVLA. You don't have to provide them with an accurate address. I'm not sure if ICO has looked at this dual or perhaps misleading use of data holding by shops. I agree that they probably use their database. I wonder how they get a warrant though? Surely a databse entry isn't enough?
ender89 12y ago
The craziest part of this is that in the UK you need to pay a fee to pick up publicly broadcasted unencrypted television signals. I wonder what the hell is the basis of this "fee"?
- TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
  The basis is that those signals must be paid for somehow.

226 points by k-mcgrady 12y ago

blueflow 12y ago

Im not much surprised. A lot of people told that things like this will happen.

rmc 12y ago

It's not like there's a history of state abuses in Northern Ireland "to combat terrorism"....

k-mcgrady 12y ago

Honestly I'm not surprised and I don't think it'll change now that it's been exposed. It's a good example how these powers can be abused for idiotic reasons and why we need to be wary of them.

tempodox 12y ago

A perfect example of bad cases making bad law and bad law then being abused. British truants and TV watchers alike now have the honour of being treated as terrorists. The fact that it's not some overreaching surveillance body, but a pedestrian mob like the BBC who is abusing this law so blatantly, shows how badly made this law really is. Obviously, it has no safeguards against this kind of misuse. The “lawmakers” who built this travesty should be sent back to primary school.

spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
Many peopel might not know that the IRA bad lands (think steve earls copperhead road) where no go areas for quiet a few "crown servants" such as the BBC and The revenue man Arently a substatial minority of NI poluation where some what shocked post good friday when they where told "ah you have to start paying like every one else now"
- FoxNewsFacts 12y ago
  North Ireland is a no-go zone where Muslims and IRA keep police away. -FoxNewsFacts
  - spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
    Apart from the Nice man from the Eu with the CAP monney nudge nudge wink
    - spacecowboy_lon 12y ago
      hmm PIRA sympathizers and French Farmers on HN who Knew :-)
dingaling 12y ago
> British truants and TV watchers alike now have the honour of being treated as terrorists. RIPA was never about 'terrorists'. It was designed to harmonise access to investigative information across Government-affiliated organisations, including local authorities. 'Harmonise' in this context of course meant 'grant full privileges', usually only requiring the head of the organisation to sign-off. Very occasionally would the Secretary of State have to be bothered. The use of RIPA by the BBC, for example, is not a surprise, it was a scenario foreseen during the consultation period. But the bill was not modified, because that was the intent. Source: I provided input as part of informal groups during RIPA consultation.

wmt 12y ago

Strange it's news now, as BBC has been already pretty openly abusing the spirit of the RIPA legislation to hunt down petty fee dodgers. Here's a word from the BBC from 2012: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/how-does-the-bbc-use-ripa http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/how-does-the-bb...

pbhjpbhj 12y ago
It's probably a New Year thing - the TVL people can I imagine more likely win people over to buying a license at New Year when people are thinking more towards being forthright and honest as they set plans for self-improvement??

jayess 12y ago

For those of us outside the UK, they are required to pay for a license when they own a TV and watch live television. It's about $215 a year. http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology--devices-and-online-top8?WT.ac=home_plt_technology http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/te...

hackerboos 12y ago
It's currently a criminal offense to watch broadcast TV in your home without one. There is legislation moving through parliament to make this a civil offense as magistrate courts are swamped with these cases. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/24/in-court-non-payment-tv-licence-television-desperate-cases http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/24/in-court-non-...
- nmeofthestate 12y ago
  It's an offense to watch or record transmitted television stations in your home without a TV license. But it's perfectly legal to own a TV and use the on-demand portions of iPlayer (everything apart from viewing the currently-being-broadcast channel streams), Netflix, Google Play, 4od, Demand 5, DVDs, Blurays, etc etc. This is what I do. The TV Licensing website has a page where you can provide them with your reasons for not owning a TV license. This page explains (implicitly) all the things you can do sans license. And, hopefully, filling this in makes them less likely to pester you (I haven't had any contact from the licensing people). Here is the text from TV Licensing: You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder. Note how the second sentence arguably introduces confusion. You don't need a license if you use a computer but don't "Watch or record TV as it's being broadcast".
  - tomp 12y ago
    Wait, I can't quite parse your last statement... is it legal to watch BBC on demand and Netflix/DVDs without a licence, or not? (I suspect the former, but then I know nothing about this law.)

pjc50 12y ago

"The BBC declined to give any details about its use of RIPA" Nothing like transparency. The rest of the article strongly suggests this is to do with the detector vans. This is partially confirmed by a FOI query: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/prosecutions_from_television_det https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/prosecutions_from_tel... It sounds like everyone in authority believes that the use of detector vans is regulated by RIPA. I think this is due to section 2: (2)For the purposes of this Act, but subject to the following provisions of this section, a person intercepts a communication in the course of its transmission by means of a telecommunication system if, and only if, he— (a)so modifies or interferes with the system, or its operation, (b)so monitors transmissions made by means of the system, or (c)so monitors transmissions made by wireless telegraphy to or from apparatus comprised in the system, as to make some or all of the contents of the communication available, while being transmitted, to a person other than the sender or intended recipient of the communication. The detector vans are rumored to work by picking up the IF of the TV's heterodyne receiver. I guess this counts as "interception" of a signal, even though it's a signal that was publicly broadcast in the first place. This could all be cleared up by a clear statement from someone about what surveillance is taking place, but of course everyone loves secrecy and there's no honesty in public debate.

pbhjpbhj 12y ago
>The BBC declined to give any details about its use of RIPA. It argued that "maintaining uncertainty" about enforcement practices was part of its strategy to keep evasion to a minimum. // Hmm. On a side note where I work we used to get calls from the music licensing authorities, I always thought they just wanted to listen for background sounds so they could send in enforcers to fine us. I wonder if the BBC are doing that (perhaps buying recorded calls from marketeers, or such, and parsing for TV sounds??) - that would fall in to intercepting communications I feel.
- nitrogen 12y ago
  Has anybody ever reverse engineered the Nielsen (or the UK equivalent) audio watermarking codes that their automated survey apps rely on to record what shows and ads are viewed, and when (DVR)?

noonespecial 12y ago

I think maybe "terrorism" is just the new term for crime of all levels now. Because crime makes people afraid right? Perhaps I'm terrified that if too many of those rotten tax dodgers skip out on thier tv tax there might not be another season of Doctor Who. Scary stuff.

cm2187 12y ago
There is a useful guide for this: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2013/11/Terrorist-chart.jpg http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303...

ha292 12y ago

Let us pause for a second an think what could possibly happen with anti-terrorism laws like this in not-so-advanced democracies where there is little protection of the average citizen from the abuse of state power. Let us also think about how the leading democracies export the "democratic software" (laws) and they get copied/cited in not-so-advanced democracies in making their own laws. It is very easy for a barely-democratic state to cite a western democracy's law as a precedence. Let us then think about how many people live under democratic laws (and under strong rule of law) and compare that to the number of people without that. Depressing. I fear that these badly written anti-terrorism laws are like software flaws that will flow from system to system and harm many more people than we can see right now.

happyscrappy 12y ago
This is kind of an odd case though, where they are charging for a broadcasted signal. Does this happen in other countries?
- vidarh 12y ago
  A lot of European countries have license fees to cover public broadcasting.
- rmc 12y ago
  Yes, public service television & radio funded by a tax on all TV owning households is common.
- silentmars 12y ago
  Yes. Germany, for instance, has a similar system where you pay per TV.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
rmc 12y ago
> anti-terrorism laws like this in not-so-advanced democracies where there is little protection of the average citizen from the abuse of state power. Ummm... This is about Northern Ireland, which had an undeclared low simmering civil war for much of the late 20th century, with abuses by state powers (imprisonment without trail, soliders shooting protesters on the streets), active paramilitary groups killing civilians and state actors, and undemocratic processes (gerrymandering of votes). I think we know what happens when the UK/NI state wants to abuse one part of the population.

vidarh 12y ago

From the sounds of it ("detection equipment") this appears to be the use of detection vans that was done for decades prior to RIPA, but that now is being done subject to RIPA because RIPA covers that activity. RIPA is an awful, awful law for a lot of reasons, but the article seems to sensationalise it in that RIPA does not appear to have suddenly allowed the BBC (or rather TV Licensing, which is a separate organization) to do something they weren't allowed to do before in this case (unless something much worse is hidden behind the "detection equipment" name).

pbhjpbhj 12y ago
It could be other things. They maybe are asking ISPs to look for packets related to live viewing of TV over the internet, that seems to fit the RIPA descriptions too. Indeed I'd be surprised if Capita weren't doing/looking to do that as they could potentially find lots of people to send nastygrams to that way.

jacquesm 12y ago

Aren't compulsory fees to support local broadcasters a bit out-dated? (Regardless of the blatant abuse of the law here.)

TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
They're very common in Europe and Africa.
djhworld 12y ago
it depends really, do you want your broadcaster to be answerable to the market? one of the strongest arguments for the BBC is it's under no obligation to meet any commercial or state interests. Some people may beg to differ on that viewpoint, but the BBC is generally highly regarded in the UK and abroad, especially for its news coverage If the license fee didn't exist then the BBC would have to make programmes that satisfy the mainstream, which is usually the lowest common denominator.
- gaius 12y ago
  It's kinda like using the National Lottery to support niche interests like opera. A trick to get the unwashed masses to subsidise the toffs.

squozzer 12y ago

The BBC has dragged Western Civilization to a new low. Certainly not the finest hour in the long history of the British Empire, is it?

ingler 12y ago

I haven't seen van Eck phreaking[0] or Tempest[1] mentioned yet. Not that the BBC would use the tech, but it seems pertinent. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_phreaking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_phreaking [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename)

DanBC 12y ago
It's exactly what the "detector vans" claim to use.
- AlyssaRowan 12y ago
  They used to have some of that equipment. Amongst other things, looking for 15625Hz spikes (from the horizontal frequency of PAL CRTs). I think they phased it out in the mid-80s, or at least stopped replacing the parts when they stopped working, so there very probably isn't any working equipment left now—that's my impression, at least. Since then it's gradually phased over to essentially SELECT address FROM addresses WHERE residential=1 AND tv_licence=0; now, with a side-order of retailers reporting the addresses of people who've bought TVs (so if you bought a TV, but not a TV licence, you're probably going to get a letter, and probably thereafter a visit).
  - DanBC 12y ago
    People who sell television equipment have to, by law, ask you for your name and address and pass it on to TVLA. You don't have to provide them with an accurate address. I'm not sure if ICO has looked at this dual or perhaps misleading use of data holding by shops. I agree that they probably use their database. I wonder how they get a warrant though? Surely a databse entry isn't enough?

ender89 12y ago

The craziest part of this is that in the UK you need to pay a fee to pick up publicly broadcasted unencrypted television signals. I wonder what the hell is the basis of this "fee"?

TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
The basis is that those signals must be paid for somehow.