The United States of America, petitioner, v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others, defendants (1912)

Record Details:

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.

OKIGINAL PETITION. 29 Each one of the ten Patents Company, hcensees, was represented by one director on the board of the General Film Company, and only representatives of those companies were elected to that board. The articles of incorporation of the General Film Company recite among its purposes the following: For the purpose of buying, selling, or otherwise acquiring or disposing of letters patent and licenses under letters patent for inventions pertaining to the production and use of photographic or other negatives, and photographic or other positives of objects at rest and objects in motion; manufacturing, buying, using, selling, or otherwise acquiring or disposing of apparatus, materials, etc., equipping theatres, halls, and similar places of amusement * * *. A copy of the charter of General Film Company is attached hereto as a part of this petition, marked ^^ Exhibit 6.'^ Before the organization of the General Film Company defendants, who were to be its officers and directors, had determined the amount of money the new company should expend in order to acquire, by purchase, by driving out of business, by cancellation of licenses by the Patents Company, or by other appropriate methods, all the licensed rental exchanges, to wit, $2,480,000 cash and $988,800 in preferred stock in the new company. Something less than that amount defendants in fact expended before January, 1912, in bringing to a successful conclusion the unlawful plan which they had set out to accomplish. As has been pointed out previously (supra, 23), defendants, through the Patents Company, had incorporated in the license agreements with the rental exchanges a provision authorizing the Patents Company to terminate the agreement at any time upon two weeks' notice, and immediately