Screening a film for "criticism and review"

Ok. Yes. You are right. In most cases, it is hard to draw a bright line between fair use and infringement.

On the other hand, my point about fair use as an affirmative defense stands.

BTW, here are some links to UK copyright and fair use (often called “fair dealing” in UK law) information:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID875384_code549519.pdf?abstractid=875384&mirid=1 (pdf) (discussion begins at pdf page 17)
P-01: UK Copyright Law fact sheet :: The UK Copyright Service
P-09: Understanding Fair Use (Copyright Law fact sheet) :: The UK Copyright Service
http://www.swarb.co.uk/lawb/ipFairUse.shtml
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

First of all, in U.S. copyright, there is the educational exemption which allows (among other things) educators to screen films in their classes. But only in their class and for a pedagogical reason. You couldn’t screen it to the whole school or whole campus without having secured the public performance rights.

That being said, the university library where I work sometimes has two copies of a film, a regular ol’ DVD or VHS which you’ll find on the shelf and a public performance copy buried deep in the bowels of media services. If the student activities co-ordinator for the university wanted to screen King Kong, say at Freshman Orientation, (s)he’d have to make sure that the public performance rights were secured, even if a film professor was invited to make lengthy comments on the movie.

That being said, I’m a librarian and definitely not a lawyer.

I agree that the showing of the film must have an educational purpose, although I thought that went without saying.

However, I know of nothing in U.S. that prohibits showings of complete films, rather than just no more than necessary.

Gfactor gave the link to the U.S. code in post #5. Although the legalese is heavy, I don’t see anything there that forbids the showing of ordinary films in their entirety.

As I said earlier, national copyright laws do vary considerably in their fine details, and this provision may be different in the U.K.

Point five: The owner of copyright has the exclusive rights to …

(bolding mine)

That’s pretty much it right there, isn’t it?

Additionally, one of the factors considered in a case where someone is alleging “fair use” is

You’re looking at the wrong link. (Did you honestly think the legalese was heavy in section 106?)

You need to look at section 110, the one that begins:

Some links about section 110:
http://www.angelfire.com/or/Copyright4Producers/harrington.html
http://classweb.gmu.edu/jkozlows/copyrite.htm
http://www.loc.gov/nls/reference/factsheets/copyright.html
http://www.utsystem.edu/OGC/intellectualProperty/copypol2.htm
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~copyrght/Docs_Html/III_ABC.htm
http://www.admin.utah.edu/ppmanual/6/6-6.html