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.

146 PAET VIII. H. & H. Film Service, Chicago, 111., Oct. 11, 1910. Western Film Ex., Joplin, Mo., Nov. 10, 1910. Western Film Ex., Milwaukee, Wis., Nov. 10, 1910. Swaab Film Service, Philadelphia, Pa., Dec. 19, 1910. Lake Shore Film & Supply Co., Cleveland, Ohio, Feb. 15, 1911. 7. Theaters canceled. Between August 18, 1909, and December 30, 1912, the defendants, through the Patents Co., canceled the licenses of 512 theaters located in 45 States of the United States for the reason that those theaters had exhibited unlicensed pictures. (Govt. Ex. 235, II, 1243, fol. 2, not printed in the record.) Between September 14, 1909, and November 26, 1912, the Patents Co. refused to grant licenses to 147 theaters located in 32 States. (Govt. Ex. 236, II, 1243, fol. 3, not printed in record.) Between August 18, 1909, and July 6, 1912, the licenses of 62 theaters were canceled on account of loaning or subrenting licensed motion pictures. (Govt. Ex. 238, II, 1243, fol. 4, not printed in record.) Mr. Marvin testified on January 25, 1913, that the rule prohibiting the use of unlicensed pictures was being enforced at the time he testified. (I, 129, fol. 1.) Government Exhibit 235 shows that defendants through the Patents Co. canceled the licenses — that means, cut oK the supply of films — of the fol