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 #:
00044
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.

2 2494 Petitioner's Exhibit No. 254. issues in this action; that they are not binding upon any of these defendants, and that they have no probative force whatever, and are, for the purposes of this action, but the mere breath of rumor; also on the ground that this is not proper cross examination. The articles offered are received in evidence, and are marked "Petitioner's Exhibit 254," and are as follows : Petitioner's Exhibit No. 254. THE UNITED FILM SERVICE ASSOCIATION AND THE FILM MANUFACTURERS. The Buffalo convention is a thing of the past. On February 8 and 9 there was formed one of the largest combines of industries, comprising manufacturers and film rental concerns of America, that are recorded in the history of cinematography. Headed by the Edison Manufacturing Company, who claim to hold the sole right to issue licenses to manufacturers to use a perforated film, the following firms are in the combine: Kalem Company, Inc., New York; Vitagraph of America, New York; Pa the Freres (France), New York; Geo. Melies (France), New York; S. Lubin, Philadelphia; Essanay Film Manufacturing Company, Chicago, and Selig Polyscope Company, Chicago, together with the film renting concerns whose names appear on another page. We don't know whether to call this a gigantic trust, or a combine, or an association for the improvement of trade and protection of allied interests. Our attitude up to the present has been one of neutrality, a position which we will retain and simply state facts without fear or favor. We have been interested spectators of a game of chess, and have been absorbed in the various moves of the players; so much so, that when we saw a bad move, we gave forth an exclamation at the carelessness of the players, when a pawn, or other piece, was captured through an inadvertent move. The game is still before us; the supreme move of checkmate is not yet made. Since our return from Buffalo we have been inundated with queries as to the position of those firms outside the