The Act is a muddle. However, the principal relevant offence is in S 136 (1) - either carrying on a licensable activity, or knowingly permitting (you don't have to know its wrong, only that it's going on).

There are some defences in S 136 (2) and eg a person does not commit an offence if his ONLY involvement is to perform live music.

But in Sch. 1, para 1 (6) a person is not to be taken as being "concerned in the organisation or management of entertainment" ONLY if he
(a) chooses the music
(b) determines the manner in whch HE performs or plays it (so a bandleader or choreographer is not safe); or
(c) provides any facilities forthe purposes of HIS performance (so a man who lends another a guitar is not safe)

This does however assume that Sch 1. Para 1(6) informs the construction of S 136 and that is not really what Sch 1 Para 1(6) is for: it is mainly there to help (if that is the right word) figure out when private events are for consideration or profit. I think the courts will probably try to read the Act as a coherent whole (fat chance), so I reckon that that para will determine that a person is involved in organisation or management so that in such a case his involvement will not be ONLY as a performer for the purposes of S 136(2).

Is that clear? (Hollow laugh)