Again, The act that you are quoting (The Licensing Act 2003), has nothing to do with copyright. I understand that it may be used as a guide by societies when licensing for the public performance of music... But this does not change my argument; as the law stands, it is very unclear on certain situations, hence the dispute. I believe that the blame should not be entirely on PRS, as the law (1998) is so unclear.

Also, the details you gave above are still very unclear - what can be deemed 'a performance of live music' (2e) - the whole song?, 1 minute?, 2 seconds? two bars?

This is the problem...

Of course the issue should be addressed, and I'm sure it will be, after articles appearing in the press. At the end of the day, royalty collection societies throughout the world work on behalf of their members, so, as you say, they should be consulted.

Also, in regards to merging all licences into one - I think this would be an ideal situation, but from what I have read, it will be very difficult to do this, as they have some fundamental differences. One example is the way they charge a premises (PPL & PRS), one can only dream.