Hamish

Repeating your misquotation does not make it true. What I said was "the musician as such does not commit an offence under the Act". It is certainly possible for a musician or anyone else to commit an offence by doing something beyond playing music.

It would be easy to be sucked into a series of postings along recent lines and just generate more confusion - so I will forego the temptation.

However one aspect of your last posting could be seriously misleading. The act is much clearer about the offences that can be committed by organising unlicensed performances than even you suggest it is about the offences resulting form performing so you are holding uot a flase hope to a performer in suggesting that he can organise and promote a gig and then protect himself by not playing.

In your recent postings you have not addressed the impact of the exemption for "incidental music" which is explicitly defined not to be regulated entertainment (Schedule 1 Para 7). Incidental music is defined as music incidental to any activity other than one which is itself entertainment or the provision of entertainment facilites. On this basis music incidental to drinking in a pub (which is a nearly ideal description of most sessions) is incidental music and hence is not regulated entertainment. I recognise that there may be some sessions at festivals which would not be covered by this exemption but where do you see the boundary which has to be crossed for the music to cease to be incidental and to become regulated entertainment?