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 #:
000267
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.

W. Allen Kenney, Direct Examination. 2717 obtain your service at that time? A. Well, we have taken service from the O. T. Crawford Film Exchange of Saint Louis. They had a branch in Louisville, and Carl Laemmle, of Evansville, and Kleine, of Chicago, and I think at one time of the Pittsburgh Calcium Light Company, of Cincinnati. Q. When you were taking service from these four exchanges you have enumerated did you find it possible to fix upon a definite program for your theatres in advance, to advertise the same, and to show the programs so advertised on the date set? A. We never got our program until the films arrived on the morning they were to be shown. Q. What was the reason for that? A. Well, I don't know, unless the people that were buying the films didn't know themselves. We were running first run stuff, and we would never know what it was until that morning. Q. Now, after you began taking service from the General Film Company did you then begin to announce your programs in advance and to advertise them? A. Oh, yes. We have a newspaper, or rather have an employe to do the newspaper work, and we get our programs in for flu1 following week on Thursday, and we know what we are to have each day in advance, and advertise just the same as a theatre would do. Q. Do your representatives, so far as you know, ever make any requests of the General Film Company for certain reels or for changes of program? A. Yes, sir, Ave do, Q. Do you find that the General Film Company co-opcrates with them? A. Yes, sir, they do whenever it is possible. Q. Were you at any time interested in any film exchange in any way directly or indirectly? A. Indirectly with the Crawford. Q. What do you mean by "indirectly?" Did you have some stock in it? A. No, in the Casino Amusement Company, Mr. Crawford was our partner and one of the stockholders and officers of the Casino Amusement Company, and the Casino Amusement Company and the Crawford Exchange were together, and we operated the exchange there in Louisville for him. Q. Did you find that an advantage for the Casino Amuse ment Company? A. Very much so.