In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants (1913)

Record Details:

Title:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants
Date:
1913
Publisher:
New York, Appeal Printing Co.
Volume:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants : record volume 2
Leaf #:
000563
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
The Museum of Modern Art Library, New York
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
These seven volumes contain the testimonies and supporting documents from the U.S. District Court's antitrust lawsuit against the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC). Formed in 1908, the MPPC (sometimes referred to asœ"the Edison Trust" or just "the Trust") sought to control the American film industry through pooling patents and demanding that producers and exhibitors acquire licenses to those patents. Independent producers and exhibitors, who refused to license the patents, argued that the MPPC was an unlawful monopoly. In 1912 and 1913, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania heard testimonies from both MPPC members, such as Siegmund Lubin, and "Independents" who later became Hollywood moguls, such as William Fox. Ultimately, in 1915, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which found the MPPC in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and spelled the end for the already weakening MPPC. -- Eric Hoyt, 2012
Date Added:
September 21, 2023
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

James J. Lodge, Cross Examination. 1181 Q. Were you ever present at any meeting of the licensed manufacturers of the Motion Picture Patents Company? A. At the one that we signed the license that night. That was the only one. Q. The only meeting that you ever attended, then, was the meeting of December 18th, 1908? A. I could not before. Because there was no Motion Picture Patents Comapny until that night. Q. That was the only meeting, then, that you ever attended at which the licensed manufacturers were present? A. Let me see — none after. But the meetings of the Edison Motion Picture Patents and the previous licensees, I attended two or three of them. Q. You are speaking in this affidavit of the licensed manufacturers of the Motion Picture Patents Company at which discussions with reference to the formation of the General Film Company took place, as you say. Now, I want to know what meetings of the licensed manufacturers of the Motion Picture Patents Company you attended, at which that subject was discussed? A. Two or three of them, of the Edison manufacturers, which was the same in personnel as the Motion Picture Patents Company, and technically I suppose I am wrong there, but it was a meeting of the same licensees ; but it was that first and only meeting that ever I attended of the Motion Picture Patents Company, because I could not attend them before because it was created that night. Q. Do you mean to say that you attended some meetings of the Edison licensees at which the formation of the General Film Company was discussed? A. Undoubtedly. The prospective formation of it, yes, sir. A year before I knew about it, and was so informed by my president of my company. A year before the General Film Company was created I had heard through the president of my company, Mr. Melies, that such was to be the case. Q. I am not asking you about that. A. I am volunteering that. Q. I am asking you when you attended any meeting of the licensed manufacturers at which that subject was discussed? A. The exact date I could not tell you, but at what meetings, — a couple of them — the meetings previous to this one, it was spoken of. Q. You are ready to swear, Mr. Lodge, that you attended some meeting of the licensed manufacturers prior to De