Last year there was quite a discussion about the fee UKers pay to the BBc to watch TV. I came across this story, which on its face is ridiculous, as the article indicates. But what stuns is the links at the bottom, especially the "assault" and the "no license" link.

I wouldn't take too much notice if this site if I were you. There are many inaccuracies in it - for example, I very much doubt that the Metropolitan Police have much influence in the City of London (as is implied here) since the City has its own force (The City of London Police, would you believe?).

There are moves afoot to change the system. At the moment they are only proposals but they include sharing the license fee among broadcasters other than the BBC which would leave the BBC underfunded.

Another proposal has come about because its possible to watch programs on the internet from sites provided by the broadcasters. In order to turn this into a revenue stream they have suggested that everybody who has a telephone whether they make use of the internet or not, in fact whether they own a computer or not should pay an extra 50 pence a month because they can potentially make use of the service.
The idea is that this will enable them to make high speed broadband more widely available.

Why they don't simply propose making the services available on subscription only is anybody's guess. My guess is that they think they will get more money if they charge everybody.