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 #:
000298
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.

2 2748 Horace M. Thomas, Direct Examination. and their seating capacities? A. People's, 1,000; Gem, 400; Grand, 300; Deever, 800; Happy Hour, 300. Q. Are those all motion picture houses? A. Yes, sir. They all run over one reel. Two of them run vaudeville, but they are motion picture houses. They run four reels apiece. That does not include the Jefferson and the other three. I class that as a vaudeville house. Mr. Grosvenor: But it shows motion pictures? The Witness: Yes, it shows two reels. The Pathe Weekly. Mr. Grosvenor: You include two vaudevilles, though, among these independent houses? The Witness: Yes, but those are ten-cent houses. The Jefferson charges ten, twenty and thirty cents. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. During the time you have been an exhibitor of motion pictures, have you been familiar with the prices of programs? A. Yes, sir. Q. How do the prices that you are now paying compare with the prices you were paying in 1909 and 1910? A. Well, there has not been any increase, and owing to the fact that there has been an arrangement of the films, I am paying less, because I don't have to use quite as new pictures as I used to have. Q. Do you mean that you are not paying any more money, but that you are getting more pictures? A. No. In the days of competition, I had to get first-run film, I was forced to run earlier films than I am now, when I run twenty-day stuff. Q. Are you solicited from time to time by representatives of the unlicensed exchanges? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do they offer you any inducements in the way of pro^ grams or prices? A. They know I am a great booster for the General Film, and some of them are personal friends of mine, but I tell them that the qualities of their pictures are not as good. The prices are about the same. Q. The prices are about the same? A. The prices are about the same.