Yes.

And it's a hard call, what position to take. No one wants to claim that a songwriter shouldn't get paid for his (DON'T START - I'm 68 years old, I was taught in childhood that where the sex of the subject is indefinite, the masculine is construed to include both genders, and I'm not going to change until I get definite proof that the rule has officially changed. And there is no source in English with no more official power than my sixth-grade English teacher. So don't start.) work. But in practice, songwriters get little or nothing our of the payments to the rights organizations. Suits get most of it. What does go to songwriters is distributed on the basis of monitoring radio play. Most of the songs that I do, that are not my own or public domain, or covered by the parody exemption, are by people who get no radio play, or only a little on obscure stations. So if I do their songs in a small venue, they are very unlikely to realize a penny of whatever fee the venue has to pay.

Further, if the venue claims exemption on the basis that the music being performed is all originals or public domain, it should be up to the rights organization to prove that licensed material is being performed - not up to the venue to prove that it isn't.

I think an exemption should be made below a minimum audience size, to start.

Peter