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 (1914)

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:
1914
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 5
Leaf #:
00027
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.

Petitionees Exhibit No. 252. 2177 evidence, on the ground that it is wholly immaterial, and on the further ground that it unnecessarily encumbers the record. Mr. Grosvenor : The purpose of introducing this and subsequent extracts from these trade papers is to impeach and discredit the testimony given by this witness on direct examination. Mr. Kixgsley : I object to it as incompetent, immaterial and irrelevant; not binding upon any of the defendants, not properly proven, and hearsay. Mr. Grosvenor: And particularly the questions and answers which were read to the witness at the beginning of the cross examination. Mr. Caldwell: And if that is the purpose of the offer, to discredit the witness, I object to it on the further ground that it does not even remotely discredit him. Mr. Grosvenor : This being simply part of the general testimony along the same lines which is to be introduced, and forming the first step. Mr. Kingsley: I object to the admission of this extract for the purpose of discrediting the witness, on the ground that it does not appear to be a declaration of the witness, or anything with which he was remotely connected, or for which he was responsible in any way, and as not binding on him, and having no probative force, with respect to impeaching his evidence. The same is marked "Petitioner's Exhibit No. 252/' and is as follows : Petitioner's Exhibit No. 252. CONVENTION OF MANUFACTURERS AND FILM RENTERS. Gentlemen, In response to the many letters and queries recently received by manufacturers of moving picture films regarding the present and future of the Moving Picture Industry, the undersigned Manufacturers and Importers have decided to hold a convention on Saturday and Sunday, November 16 and 17, 1907.