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 #:
000204
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.

2G54 Samuel E. Morris, Direct Examination. Q. What service did you have at the beginning, and what was the price? A. From whom? Q. Well, from the Lake Shore Film Company at the time you began to operate the Home Theatre? A. I paid them forty-five dollars a week. Q. How many reels did that pay for? A. Sixteen a week. Q. What service are you getting or using now? A. Today I use thirty-five reels. Q. And what do you pay? A. Sixty-five dollars. Q. Has the price increased or diminished? A. Proportionately, it is cheaper. Q. Do you find that the licensed makers of motion pictures are competing among themselves for the good will of the exhibitors? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do they send you circulars? A. All of them send advance notices. Q. And do you receive letters and circulars urging you to demand certain makes of films from your exchange? A. Yes, sir. Q. What projecting machine do you use at the Home Theatre? A. Power's. Q. Have you ever used the unlicensed service at the Home Theatre? A. No, sir. Q. Have you any immediate competitor who is using the licensed service, and by that I mean the same service, in the immediate neighborhood? A. One. Q. Do you have any difficulty with respect to keeping your program clear from his program? A. Wei], we can't keep it clear, because both of us use the same amount of reels, but we have an understanding with the exchange and ourselves that is agreeable to us. Q. Is the situation satisfactory so far as this competitor is concerned? A. Yes, sir, we are both satisfied. Q. Have you any other competitor in the immediate neighborhood who is using the unlicensed service? A. Yes, sir. Q. How many are there using the unlicensed service in your neighborhood? A. Two. Q. What theatres are those? A. One is the Manhattan and the other one is the Comet. Q. What is the seating capacity of the Manhattan? A. In the neighborhood of six hundred.