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 #:
000177
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. 1403 Well We are getting 3 Patha 1 Selig and 1 Biagrapli each Week and the Rest is made up of very good Reels. So I think the Service is far from good in this Part of the Country Hoping you Can give us the name of Some Exchange in this State that Will Live up to their aggreements and try to Give us What We Want and Pay for. We Remain Yours WILCOX & WILCOX. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. I show you a letter dated Toledo, Ohio, August 15th, 1910, signed by the Kent Film Service Company, accompanied by a letter dated Octavia, Ohio, August 15th, 1910, signed by George E. Schuster. Did you receive these letters? A. I did. Mr. Kingsley : I offer them in evidence. Mr. Grosvenor: Same objection. The papers offered are received in evidence and marked "Defendants' Exhibit No. 84," and are as fol 3 lows : Defendants' Exhibit No. 84. Letterhead of THE KENT FILM SERVICE CO. Toledo, Ohio, August Fifteenth, 1910. The M. P. Patents Company, 80 Fifth Ave., New York City. 4 Gentlemen : — We are enclosing herewith a letter received from George E. Schuster, Mgr. of the Victory Theatre, Ottawa, Ohio, reference to the Ohio Film Exchange driving Theatres to the Independent ranks. Yours very truly, THE KENT FILM SERVICE COMPANY.