"which is now commonly (and therefore reasonably) lumped under the term folk."
It may be accepted by you Tom, but certainly not commonly so - go and look at the number of books with 'folk' in the title and try to square that particular circle. We've been here before, but your definition/non-definition exists only in your head and in those of your fellow singer-songwriters - it certainly is not 'common' and has no substance, therefore, no validity outside of your small puddle.
It is very much part of the damage done and continuing to be done - not the least of which is the financial drain caused by lumping together public domain and copyrightable material.
I can't find the quote but at the risk of being accused of misquoting you, I'm pretty sure it was you who said you had tried persuading the leeches-that-be to separate the two, but they had refused for fear of letting some pennies slip through the net (rather like locking up innocents at Guantanamo for fear of letting a guilty terrorist escape) - so the leechs continue to leech.
Maybe it's time for a civil disobedience campaign were we get to tell the parasitic bodies such as IMRO and PRS to sling their hook and go and live off somebody else's back.
It may be a means of earning a living to you Tom, but to most of us it's a calling (and a life-long one at that).
Jim Carroll