Brief for the United States (1914)

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.

54 PART IV. in accordance with the terms of a unifomi exchange license agreement. A printed so-called ^'exchange-license agreement" draAvn up by the manufacturers Avas imposed upon the exchange men early in January, 1909. Thereafter not one of the licensed manufacturers Avould sell, lease, or consign films to any rental exchange which had not signed one of these so-called license agreements with the Patents Co. ; furthermore, every rental exchange was not afforded an opportunity to enter into such an agreement, for the defendants, acting through the Patents Co., refused licenses to a large number of the rental exchanges. Most of these were driven out of business. To 116 of the rental exchanges the Patents Co. granted licenses. Under the terms of these agreements the Patents Co. reserved the right to terminate the license at any time without cause on 14 days' notice hy it, and to cancel the agreement at once on breach of any of its terms by the rental exchange. After such tei'mination of an agreement the exchange can not obtain films from any of the licensed manufacturers. These agreements destroyed all competiticm between the rental exchanges, for they prescribed the inauiicr in which the exchange should do business, which was made the same for ail (exchanges. Thereaftei' the defendants, acting through the Patents Co., prevented the exchanges from competing with each other for the business of the exhibitors by prohii)iting any two exchanges from serving the same exhibitor.