In reference to the ongoing discussion regarding copyright, and the
playing of copyrighted pieces in public, a few things come to mind.
The first is the distinction between "public performance" and "public
performance for profit".

I wonder how, for example, my junior high school band handled the
ASCAP regulations (which they surely were aware of) when we played
arrangements of such pop tunes as "Feelings", "Copacabana", "Song
Sung Blue" and "The Muppet Show Theme" in our concerts (concerts which,
by the way, we didn't charge admission for).  I do recall that at least
"The Muppet Show Theme" didn't make it onto the LP record we sold, due
to the copyright issue, but it was in the free concert.

It has always been my understanding (and I may be wrong on this) that
the copyright restrictions are for public performance _for profit_,
also for unauthorized reproduction of printed copies.

I am reminded of some of the stories I've heard of Max Kortlander's
dealings with ASCAP during his tenure running QRS.  As the stories go,
he apparently thought it idiotic (and rightfully so) that both his
company and ASCAP were spending more on the bookkeeping required to
document and calculate the necessary payments than the actual amount of
the payments.  Still, ASCAP wouldn't budge on their stance, even though
he was able to show them convincing evidence that they were wasting
both time and money.  Ahh, bureaucracy...

Bryan Cather