Keith Gilbert, PRS Performance Sales Director said: "Music shops pay like everyone else, but get a 30 per cent discount if their only music use is for demonstration purposes."

Perhaps Mr Gilbert could explain which it is - demonstration purposes or performance? He appear to what it both ways.

I am sure he would not offer his generous 30% discount on a venue who claimed their entertainment was not performance but for demonstration purposes.

Why is the PRS so-called? Why is it not called the Demonstration Purposes Society?

The starting point for all of these things is the performance of entertainment. Every damn fool knows that the starting point to this defines itself as someone paying someone else to perform to an audience.

All of these problems to activities that are not this - occur because this common sense definition is ignored by those who are empowered to enforce these things and who try to stretch these definitions - whatever the effect of this may be. In the case of organisations like PRS - to the long-term damage of the very thing they are supposed to be protecting.

A needless try-out to squeeze music shops where there clearly is no performance involved could result in a situation where instrument makers have no outlets and established performers will not be able to (cheaply) obtain the instruments they need to ply their trade. Less instruments and less shops means less opportunities for people to get started and all of this will be bad news for PRS - who will have less members as result.