Damn right that the PRS should be apologising to a shopworker who they hassled for a licence because she was singing while she worked:
She told the BBC news website: "I would start to sing to myself when I was stacking the shelves just to keep me happy because it was very quiet without the radio.
"When I heard that the PRS said I would be prosecuted for not having a performance licence, I thought it was a joke and started laughing.
"I was then told I could be fined thousands of pounds. But I couldn't stop myself singing.
"They would need to put a plaster over my mouth to get me to stop, I can't help it."
The trouble is, the PRS line seems to be in response to the outcry, not because it was capable of seeing this sort of thing as being a result of its central policy, and paying its "inspectors" a bonus if they do well. I guess we should be thankful that at least this time they've backed down rather than grimly pushing ahead (as with the woman who was told she needed a licence to play the radio to her horses).
This organisation, though, is being treated as a serious player in shaping copyright for the 21st century - and it takes a public outcry before it admits that you don't need to pay a licence to hum while you work. Are they really a credible voice?