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 3
Leaf #:
00085
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.

H. N. Marvin, Direct Examination. 1311 1913, by and between Motion Picture Patents Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey, and having an office at Orange, in said State, party of the first part (hereinafter referred to as the Licensor), and George Kleine, of Chicago, Illinois, party of the second part (hereinafter referred to as the Licensee), witnesseth that: 2. Whereas, the Licensor represents that it is organized to own, deal in and grant licenses under Letters Patent pertaining to the motion picture art, and that it is the owner of all the right, title and interest in and to the following United States Letters Patent, all relating to improvements in the motion picture art : No. 578,185, dated March 2, 1897, for Vitascope, granted to Thomas Arinat; No. 580,719, dated April 13, 1897, for Vitascope, granted to Thomas Armat; No. 586,953, dated July 20, 1897, for Phantascope, granted to Charles F. Jenkins and Thomas Armat ; No. 588,916, dated August 21, 1897, for Kinetoscope, granted to Charles M. Campbell, as the assignee of Willard G. Stewart and Ellis F. Frost; No. 629,063, dated July 18, 1899, for Kinetoscopic Camera, granted to American Mutoscope Company as the assignee of Herman Casler; No. 673,329, dated April 30, 1901, for Kinetoscope, granted to The American Vitagraph Company as the assignee of Albert E. Smith; No. 673,992, dated May 14, 1901, for Vitascope, granted to Thomas Armat; No. 707,934, dated August 26, 1902, for Projecting Kinetoscope, granted E. & H. T. Anthony & Co. as assignee of Woodville Latham; No. 722,382, dated March 10, 1903, for Animated Picture Apparatus, granted to American Mutoscope & Biograph Company as the assignee of John A. Pross; No. 744,251, dated November 17, 1903, for Kinetoscope, granted Albert E. Smith; No. 12,192, dated January 12, 1904, for Kinetoscopic Film, granted to Thomas A. Edison, the same being