[longjack]

Network TV in over here is received via satellite dishes. There are no outside analog antenas, rabitt ears, etc. The dishes have replaced those.

You need a receiver, but those are cheap, and you pay the same TV tax as the analog days, but the network programming is FTA.

What I see, then, after stripping away all the bureaucratic jargon that devolved after the fact, is that the case arose because a landlord told his renters they couldn't have TV.

It's not like the US where a dish is optional for TV.

[BruceS]

Even if it is necessary to have a satellite dish to receive televison, that does not make having television a human right. The right to property is a fundamental human right (see the US Declaration of Independence) and telling a landlord that they must do something that harms their building or its value interferes with their right to property.

If the tenants can't get TV reception, let them find another place to live. If the landlord can't get tenants (or at least quality tenants), they will either lose money or allow a satellite dish.

As with most things mandated by government, the free marketplace will take care of the situation.