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 #:
000285
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.

Morris A. Choynski, Direct Examination. 2735 per cent, cheaper than you did under the old conditions? A. Oh, positively. Q. What program did you have in 1909, and the early part of 1910? A. In 1909 and 1910 I showed two reels, and changed them three times a week. Q. What did you pay at that time? A. I paid $45.00. Q. Will you tell us what you were paying* the General Film Company and the kind of program you had before you began to take the Mutual service some months ago? A. I paid $15.00 to the General from 1910, and changed three times a week, two reels. Then they found that they could not give me that program for the three days and the two days, and that there was such a demand for the every day film, so they gave me a change every day at the same price. Then the competition became very keen, and people were showing more than two reels. I showed two reels when people were showing three, so, owing to the competition, I had to change every day, and then they gave me three reels, but my price always remained the same. The same service, and added on the extra reel. Q. How do the prices that you were paying the General Film Company at the time you began to take the Mutual service, compare with the prices you then paid the Mutual Exchange? A. I have got to pay a little more now than what I had to the General. Q. You are now taking from the Universal, are you not? A. The Universal. Q. How do the prices of the Mutual service compare with the service furnished you by the General Film Company? A. The prices are practically the same. There is no difference. Q. And do I understand you to say that the Universal is a little more than the General Film? A. It is a little more. We have got to pay more to round out the same program. Q. Did you find it possible to get a complete program of Mutual pictures? A. No, we cannot. Q .Are you getting a complete program now of Universal? A. No. Q. What pictures are you running now witli them? A. We are running what they call free-lance features, Q. Did yon find that the Universal and Mutual were