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 #:
000262
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.

2712 Isaac H. Rubein, Direct Examination The Witness : There is ten or twelve. I am just naming the most important ones. I can mention several others in the suburbs, but I am mentioning these right in the heart of the city. Charlie Naymer is operating five independent houses, but I have only named two of his theatres. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. You have stated that you are interested in the motion picture theatrical business in other cities? A. St. Paul and Minneapolis. Q. What are your interests in St. Paul and Minneapolis? A. I have the Majestic Theatre there with a seating capacity of a thousand. Q. In which town? A. In St. Paul. Q. Yes. A. I also have the Princess Theatre in St. Paul, with a seating capacity of about 1,300. Q. And Minneapolis? A. I have the New Grand Theatre in Minneapolis, 1,350. Q. So you have three theatres in St. Paul and Minneapolis? A. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you had the three theatres? A. I have had one of them about four years, and the others about three years. Q. What service do you run in these three theatres? A. I am running the General Film service, and also the Famous Players in one of them. Q. And does your testimony with respect to definite programs from the General Film Company apply to the three theatres you have in St. Paul and Minneapolis, as well as to the two theatres that you had in Des Moines? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you ever have any experience in taking service from an exchange where the owner was manager or interested in another theatre? A. The experience that I had previous to the General Film Company taking over the Van Duzee office, which was buying the products now controlled by the General Film Company — it was owned by Mr. Van Duzee. Mr. Van Duzee, at the time we were taking service from him, owned several theatres, one — -two of them, in fact — right on the opposite side of the si reef of one of my theatres. The Alhambra and the Gem. And we Avere taking service from him and paying him a good