Outdoor Aerial Being Aplitted

Okay this is the scenario.

I have a roof top aerial from which I get my tv signal to the living room
telly and it's good enough for me.
I want to use a splitter to get the tv signal to the conservatory at the
back of the house running the cable under the floorboards and up through the
conservatory wall.
I have tried this (a dummy run over the floorboards) and the TV's work okay.
When both tellies are on the signal strength drops a wee bit but nothing
drastic and the Winter Hill transmitter from which I get the TV signal is
boosting it's digital output in November when we all go digital in the
Granada region.
I am enquiring as to what type/grade/class of cable would best serve my
purpose?

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:33:00 +0100, Newbie asked:

I am enquiring as to what type/grade/class of cable would best serve my
purpose?

One of the best articles to read concerning the issue of coaxial cable
and the different grades available and which you should use, can be
found at

http://www.glodark.co.UK/cable.htm

Usually, CT100, and nothing lower in quality, is the recommended grade
of cable to use.

What cable does the main aerial use then?
Also, if you are splitting in the living room, then you could use a
distribution amp and use any old cable.

Ducks behind potted plant.

Brian
"Newbie" wrote in message
...
Okay this is the scenario.

I have a roof top aerial from which I get my tv signal to the living room
telly and it's good enough for me.
I want to use a splitter to get the tv signal to the conservatory at the
back of the house running the cable under the floorboards and up through
the conservatory wall.
I have tried this (a dummy run over the floorboards) and the TV's work
okay. When both tellies are on the signal strength drops a wee bit but
nothing drastic and the Winter Hill transmitter from which I get the TV
signal is boosting it's digital output in November when we all go digital
in the Granada region.
I am enquiring as to what type/grade/class of cable would best serve my
purpose?

"Newbie" wrote in message
...
Okay this is the scenario.

I have a roof top aerial from which I get my tv signal to the living room
telly and it's good enough for me.
I want to use a splitter to get the tv signal to the conservatory at the
back of the house running the cable under the floorboards and up through
the conservatory wall.
I have tried this (a dummy run over the floorboards) and the TV's work
okay. When both tellies are on the signal strength drops a wee bit but
nothing drastic and the Winter Hill transmitter from which I get the TV
signal is boosting it's digital output in November when we all go digital
in the Granada region.
I am enquiring as to what type/grade/class of cable would best serve my
purpose?

A good quality CT100 type or PF100 (Screwfix) co-ax cable.
Using a low noise, low gain 2 output amplifier behind your original TV will
prevent signal drop. As few joints as possible and use good quality all
metal co-ax plugs without bending, kinking or pinching the cable anywhere on
the run.

"J G Miller" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:33:00 +0100, Newbie asked:

I am enquiring as to what type/grade/class of cable would best serve my
purpose?

One of the best articles to read concerning the issue of coaxial cable
and the different grades available and which you should use, can be
found at

http://www.glodark.co.UK/cable.htm

It's strange that 'Television' magazine gave their 'kind permission' to
reprint the article when they didn't own the copyright.

Bill

On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 19:52:58 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

http://www.glodark.co.UK/cable.htm

It's strange that 'Television' magazine gave their 'kind permission' to
reprint the article when they didn't own the copyright.

I wondered about that. Is it standard for authors of such articles to
retain copyright? You always seem to see "Reprinted with the kind
permission of XYZ Organisation or Magazine".
Would there be a difference in fee if doing so?

Presumably as they are defunct, even if they did own the copyright, who
would defend it?

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 19:10:33 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 19:52:58 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

http://www.glodark.co.UK/cable.htm

It's strange that 'Television' magazine gave their 'kind permission' to
reprint the article when they didn't own the copyright.

I wondered about that. Is it standard for authors of such articles to
retain copyright? You always seem to see "Reprinted with the kind
permission of XYZ Organisation or Magazine".
Would there be a difference in fee if doing so?

Presumably as they are defunct, even if they did own the copyright, who
would defend it?

I would imagine it would be defended by whoever now owns it. If a
business goes into receivership the receivers will attempt to raise
money (to pay the creditors) by selling the assets. The copyrights held
by the business are assets that might be worth something to someone.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

I wondered about that. Is it standard for authors of such articles to
retain copyright?

It is now. The copyright law changed a few years ago. These days the
copyright remains with the author unless the author explicitly gives it
away. Note, though, that there are exceptions, such as documents you write
as an employee: the copyright normally belongs to the employer. Similarly,
some publishers may still want you to give them the copyright - you are free
to do so, but it has to be your choice.

Also, if you are commissioned to write a piece, your customer may require
the author to give them the copyright. For instance, I'm writing a lot of
training material for one of the professional bodies in the UK. The terms
of the contract require me to transfer the copyright to them. That's fair
enough - they've paid me good money for it, and want full and exclusive
rights on the material.

You always seem to see "Reprinted with the kind
permission of XYZ Organisation or Magazine

Yes, prior to the recent changes, it was customary for the magazine
publisher to own the copyright on published material.

Here is a relevant excerpt from "Fact Sheet P-01: UK Copyright Law":

""Normally the individual or collective who authored the work will
exclusively own the work. However, if a work is produced as part of
employment then it will normally belong to the person/company who hired the
individual.

Freelance or commissioned work will usually belong to the author of the
work, unless there is an agreement to the contrary, (i.e. in a contract for
service).""

SteveT

In message , Bill Wright
writes
One of the best articles to read concerning the issue of coaxial cable
and the different grades available and which you should use, can be
found at

http://www.glodark.co.UK/cable.htm

It's strange that 'Television' magazine gave their 'kind permission' to
reprint the article when they didn't own the copyright.

Bill


Although it says this at the end of the article:-

Copyright ©2004 Bill Wright and TELEVISION magazine
Uploaded January 22, 2004
This file may be downloaded for private and personal use but NO part of
it may be published in any form without the prior permission of
TELEVISION magazine.

Can the copyright be owned by 2, Bill and TV Mag?
As one is defunct does it pass solely to the other?


--
Bill

When both tellies are on the signal strength drops a wee bit but nothing
drastic

It doesn't make any difference weather the TVs are on or not, only
wether there is a splitter in line or not.