Started by Paul Johnson · · 👁 5 views · 256 replies
…
slycyclist342 said:Yes,
including PCs without cards, smartphones, and tablets—since you can stream audiovisual content over the web.
slycyclist342 said:Whether you actually browse the web or watch TV is irrelevant; the fee is triggered by ownership, not usage.
So you might as well claim you're paying BNETU for your TV service too.The issue: PBS issued me a notice of violation because I don't own a TV and haven't paid the media fee. They're claiming I owe it simply because I own a laptop.
The explanation: According to Section 34 of the PBS Act, anyone owning a radio, television, or any other device capable of receiving audiovisual programming is required to pay a monthly fee to PBS. They explain that "other devices" includes computers—both laptops and desktops—since PBS broadcasts its content online as well. However, owners of computers or smartphones are exempt if someone else in their household already pays the media fee. A single household fee covers all TVs, radios, or computers within that home.Paying the media fee has nothing to do with whether you actually watch TV or listen to the radio. It’s an owner's fee for having a receiver, according to PBS.
There is your answer to the second question. 🙂
Don't beat a dead horse... I am merely stating that the law provides PBS with the legal coverage to collect this.
graniteotter6 said:They are streaming, alright. Sure, the quality is absolutely abysmal—but I suppose we shouldn't be surprised.
But honestly, comparing those two things is like comparing apples to oranges; they aren't even in the same ballpark. It feels a bit cheeky, doesn't it? We pay for the infrastructure—well, maybe not the transmitter itself, but certainly the high-speed internet—so it seems a little rich to claim this is just a hardware fee rather than paying for the content itself. At the end of the day, we're still paying for their programming, just via an internet connection... I mean, I knew that all along, but I didn't feel like bringing it up in my first reply. Besides, for the people who already signed off on it, the damage is already done.
Matthew Jackson2 said:Look, an internet stream isn't "broadcasting" in the legal sense because for that "signal" to actually reach your computer, you have to explicitly go out and request it. Beyond that, a computer can't even display that signal unless you have the specific software support installed to handle it. If you don't have Flash player—and let them try to prove I do—you can't watch the PBS stream, which means your computer isn't capable of reproducing the PBS signal and, by extension, doesn't fall under the definition of a receiver. They can't even prove you have an internet connection, let alone that your connection is fast enough to sustain a stream. It’s exactly like having an old analog TV in an area where only digital signals exist; you don't own a receiver capable of playing back audiovisual content.
Of course, when it comes to those FAQ pages, PBS interprets the law however suits their interests, but once things head toward a legal dispute, their little interpretations don't mean much anymore. If they actually dared to enter a legal battle and lost, a consumer protection group could demand they scrub that nonsense from their FAQs entirely, so they probably won't even bother stepping into a fight like that.
slycyclist342 said:Whether you actually browse the web or watch TV is irrelevant; the fee is triggered by ownership, not usage.
So you might as well claim you're paying BNETU for your TV service too.The issue: PBS issued me a notice of violation because I don't own a TV and haven't paid the media fee. They're claiming I owe it simply because I own a laptop.
The explanation: According to Section 34 of the PBS Act, anyone owning a radio, television, or any other device capable of receiving audiovisual programming is required to pay a monthly fee to PBS. They explain that "other devices" includes computers—both laptops and desktops—since PBS broadcasts its content online as well. However, owners of computers or smartphones are exempt if someone else in their household already pays the media fee. A single household fee covers all TVs, radios, or computers within that home.Paying the media fee has nothing to do with whether you actually watch TV or listen to the radio. It’s an owner's fee for having a receiver, according to PBS.
There is your answer to the second question. 🙂
Don't beat a dead horse... I am merely stating that the law provides PBS with the legal coverage to collect this.
graniteotter6 said:They are streaming, alright. Sure, the quality is absolutely abysmal—but I suppose we shouldn't be surprised.
But honestly, comparing those two things is like comparing apples to oranges; they aren't even in the same ballpark. It feels a bit cheeky, doesn't it? We pay for the infrastructure—well, maybe not the transmitter itself, but certainly the high-speed internet—so it seems a little rich to claim this is just a hardware fee rather than paying for the content itself. At the end of the day, we're still paying for their programming, just via an internet connection... I mean, I knew that all along, but I didn't feel like bringing it up in my first reply. Besides, for the people who already signed off on it, the damage is already done.
Taylor Roberts3 said:I'm not gonna lie, I have a TV, but it's just an old relic sitting there without a receiver or an antenna. Basically, I can't even watch anything. The TV is strictly there for my PlayStation.
I've been getting these bills for a while now, but since I never officially registered the set and the collector never bothered to show up at my door, I just ignored them.
Well, a few days ago, some law firm sent me a notice of violation. It’s apparently $160 debt from the PBS fee (dating all the way back to early 2013) plus about $167 extra fees for the collection process, lawyers, and whatever other bullshit they tacked on.
So now I'm wondering, what happens next? Does this actually go to court if I don't pay, or is there someone I can complain to? If they actually garnish my paycheck, someone is going to be very unhappy...
Adam Bennett23 said:Give me a break.
He pays his ISP for internet, not PBS or those other idiots.
It's like not paying your gas bill and having them shut off your water.
boldlynx23 said:Hey everyone.
Well, I just got my own lovely little piece of paperwork in the mail today:
notice of violation - warning based on report number ?????/2014
Basically, they're citing some report a "controller" supposedly wrote up one day back in January. This guy didn't even step foot inside—didn't introduce himself, just started throwing around threats about state inspectors and fines of $333 and God knows what else. I wasn't home, so my wife had the pleasure of being intimidated by him instead.
Today I finally received this official notice along with a bill from $80—I've got 8 days to pay up if I want to stop them from starting a formal "proceeding."
So here's my question: what kind of report can this clown actually write when he didn't sign anything, didn't show us any documentation, and didn't even enter the house?
Should I just pay this thing or ignore it? And what happens if I just walk away?
Thanks
mistyrider1 said:Here is the reality: we weren't home; our child (who was 15 at the time) answered the door. He told them we didn't have a TV, and then the fellow just left.
After a while, we found ourselves in the exact same situation as you. We ignored it—tossed it in the trash. We did that for two years. Then, out of nowhere, the garnishments started hitting us... four of them!!! One every six months. Over two years, that’s four separate legal actions. On top of that, the law firms that took over the collection added their own hefty fees...
No matter how you slice it, it’s a disaster!
Ultimately, we called the law offices, negotiated a reasonable payment plan, and sent a cancellation notice to NBC, which they (after we followed up) eventually accepted.
But even now, we are still paying off those debts... 🙄
Perhaps your best bet is to just bite the bullet, pay it, and then formally cancel the service?🤷
slycyclist342 said:Sunday, you should probably do some digging yourself.
First off, if I recall correctly, the statute of limitations is only one year—so you won't be able to come after me for any unpaid debts in two years.
It seems highly irregular to me that four different offices would all be initiating collections proceedings every six months.
I assume this was how the procedure went down (in response to rowdyhawk15's inquiries).
They sent a notarized affidavit—basically some unpaid invoice you supposedly owe—to a bailiff or an attorney, who then used that document as grounds to issue a notice regarding the initiation of a seizure.
I believe there is a deadline to file an appeal—eight days, if I recall correctly, though I can't say for certain.
If you file a formal complaint, they can't just hit your bank account directly; instead, they have to pass it off to the courts to initiate a lawsuit.
In court, the Public Broadcasting Service has to prove that you actually owe them anything at all, while you have to focus on proving exactly what you're already trying to establish.
Of course, if you end up losing the lawsuit, make sure to factor those legal fees into your calculations as well.
