I simply pointed out that it exsisted, in reply to a question about any possible 'hidden' cost arising from applying for the entertainment permission. A new licensee who had accepted the Government's claim that it would not cost any extra to provide entertainment under the Act, may be a little upset to find that they have to further pay for a PRS licence.

Any judgement on the PRS licence was started by you Richard. And as you did start this, perhaps one more thing needs to be added to Dave's comments in this thread, before we move back to the Act.

A session of tradiditional, original or other non-copyright material would not be liable for any payment to PRS and it would be incorrect for them to do so. But the default position held is that all live music venues must pay and the onus is one you to prove that the material in not under copyright.