[Margaret Pilkington]

Less, it is a sort of tax...but it is a hypothecated tax(unlike the Road Fund Licence)...that means that where it goes and what it funds is regulated by the Government.

I get what you are saying, but I don't have the answers.
I agree that criminalising people because they do not have a licence to receive broadcasts is daft and expensivbe daft at that...but laws are laws.
You might as well say let's not bother policing illegal drug use(and the police would pat you on the back and whole heartedly agree)...but until the law is changed that is what it is.
I think you are right in saying that other methods of funding the BBC should be sought...and I have said that in previous posts too......it is HOW to do this that is the bone of contention.
Nothing will change until some government decides that there is a better way to obtain money for communication services...because that is what we are talking about...rather than just a TV licence.

I am not sure how the government would restrict the use of technology for those who decide not to pay what is, a tax.

After all, they are using some of the TV licence fee to ensure that broadband is improved and available to the larger community.
It is in their interests to have people online...they are observable online and as such (maybe) easier to keep tabs on.
Thank you for the link to that article. It is very interesting