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 #:
000209
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.

Leland B. Kent, Cross Examination. 2659 Q. What one was that? A. The Toledo Film Exchange, and the Superior Film Exchange. Q. Do you know whether or not the Superior Film Exchange was at one time a licensed exchange? A. Yes, sir. Q. It had been. Did it continue right along in business as long as you were in business? A. Not as a licensed film exchange. Q. No. But did it continue as an independent afterwards? A. It went to pieces — well, the remnants of it is going yet. The men kept going to pieces as an independent. Q. Didn't the owner die? A. The owner died. Q. But the business is still going on in the same form? A. Yes, sir. Cross examination by Mr. Grosvenor : Q. Mr. Kent, you sold out your exchange to the General Film Company in January, 1911? A. Yes, sir. Q. At the time you sold your exchange, the General Film Company had been in business about eight months? A. About that time. Q. And in that period of eight months, the General Film Company had acquired something like fifty rental exchanges throughout the United States? A. Well, I don't know the number, but nearly all of them they had acquired. Q. You were one of the last to sell out? A. Yes, sir. Q. You knew that it had acquired these numerous exchanges throughout the country before you endeavored to sell out to that company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Your company and business had been profitable, had it not? A. Well, moderately so. Q. How much capital did you put in in 1907 when you started the rental exchange? A. $3,500. Q. And how much had you taken out in four years? A. Well, a living. Q. You had taken out a good many times $3,500, hadn't you? A. No. Q. Well, what had been your annual profit? A. Oh, I would say $50 a week. Q. And your entire investment had been $3,500? A. Yes, sir. Q. The fact that the General Film Company had acquired all these numerous exchanges in the country was one of the