New York Clipper (Oct 1915)

26 THE NEW YORK CLIPPER October 9 MOTION PICTURE DEPARTMENT HABKT ENinS, UOTIOR PICWBA EDITOR. (WVERNMENT WINS SUIT AGAINST PATENTS CO. AND GENERAL FILM* JUDGE DICKINSON HANDS DOWN DECISION IN FEDERAL COURT ORDERING DISSOLUTION OF SO-CALLE D "FDJl TRUST/' DEFENDANTS HAT CASRT CASE TO SDFREHE COURT. The Motion Flcture Patents Co. and the Oenernl FUm Co. must dlssolTe, according to a highly Im- portant and long waited legal decision handed down by Judge Dickinson, in the United States District CoOTt. In Philadelphia, last week. The opinion was given In the salt Instituted by the government under tbe Sherman Antl-Tmst Law. Tlie defendants included In the action, are the Mo- tion Picture I'atents Co.. New York City; Gen- eral Film Co., New York; Blograph Co., New York; Thomas A. liMlson, Inc., Orange, N. J.; Baaanay Film Manufacturhig Co., Chicago: Kalem Co., Inc.. New York: George Elelne, Chicago; Lubia Mannfacturlng Co., I'bllndelphla; Pa'the Freres, New Jersey: Se'.lg Polyscope Co., Chicago; Vita- graph Co., Npw York: Armot Moving Picture Co., Washington, D. C.; Frank L. Dyer: Orange, N. J.! Henry N. 'Marvin, J. J: Kennedy,. Samnel Long and J. A. Borst. or New York: Slegmond Lubln. Phila- delphia: Gaston Melles, George'K. Spoor and'W. N. Se:iK. Chicago: Albert E. Smttli. Brooklyo, ana "William Pelzer, Orange, N. J. Jodge Dickinson held that .the contracts en- tered Into by the defendants to secnre their posi- tion as the dominating power In'' the Aim basIneBa "was a conspiracy In restralnt oC trade," and that the defendants have monopolized a part of the trade In films, cameras, projecting machines and other accessories of the motion ,plctare business. The Government In its* case charged that the defendants were trying to clrcum'vent the anti- trust laws by claiming protection under the patent laws. The Government also clataied that Ave hun- dred and twelve motion picture theatres were forced out of business becanse 'the Patents Com- pany canceled their licenses so that they conld not obtain films, while one hundred and forty- seven houses were refused service because the Patents Company thought that they would not ndhere strictly to the rales of the corporation. It was also alleged that sixty-two houses we.'e caught lending or sub-leasing films leased to them by the General Film Co., and their licenses were revoked. It was argued on. behalf of the- defendants mac the Patents Company was not formed to acquire a monopoly. The main feature. It 'was aasertea, was to toisa a company to act as trustee for their •patents and Inventions, and the combination was formed to stimulate trade and not to throttle it. It was also emphasized that tlw consolidation Was needed to meet the public's taste for good pictures. The de&rndants. It la tmderstood^' will not accept tills decision as final, and 'will prepare to carry 'the matter to the Supreme Court. jicrlbed were a conspiracy In restraint of trade, and therefore Illegal, and that they constituted, with the exception of the oporatlon of the Melles Manufacturing Company, a monopoly In violation of the anti-trust laws. "The 'Melles Manufacturing Company has denied (a« have all the defendants) tha't it was in any sense a party to the .combination charged. Vie have gone over qll the proofs without finding an.v which go to. making good the charge against this JiartlcnTar defendant. It Is, therefore, excluded rom the findings made, and the petltloc as against It Is dismissed. Dlscuiselng the' rights of patent holders 'and their relation to inter-State trade and monopoly. Judge Dickinson said: "On the very Important question of patents and their relation to monopoly, which' In the opinion of the legal profession con- stltntes one of the chief values of this decision, the court said: • . "It la the right of patentees through having ez- clnslve sale of the patented article to control and In tbat sense to monopolise the trade In it. It Is wrong by an illegal restraint of trade to monopo- lize ft or any part of IL On the one band, it cannot have been Intended to make It unlawful to acquire that the right to which the law has con- ferred. On the other hand. It cannot be that the grant of patent right confers a license to do that "Which , the law condemns." U. S. GOVERNMENT vs. PATENTS CO. SUIT, LONG DRAWN OUT LEGAL BATTLE. WH. FOX STARTED ACTION AGAINST SO-CALLED *mH_TRUSr' IN 1911. The victory won las^week by the 'D.' 9. Govern- ment against the M. Pf Patents Co., General Film Co. and Its allied producing concerns, often re- ferred to as the sn-called "Film Trust," is really .the culmination of a legal-action started in De- cember, 1811, by 'WllUam Fox, the New York theatrical man. 'Mr. Fox Is and -was the leading spirit In the Greater New York Film Rental Co., and when the General Film Co. was started and exchanges were brought up right and left In 1811, he refused to Bell out to the newly formed distributing combina- tion, preferring to fight for what he deemed his right to do buuness in. his own way. -Threatened -with a cancellation of his Patents Company "license" and the cutting off of his sup- ply of pictures through the General Film Co.. Fox uistltuted Injunctive proceedings and set the legal machinery In motion with.a suit against General flfan, calliog for $1,600,000 dimagra. Gustavus E. Ilogers, of Rogers & Sogers, a Ann of New York lawyers, represented Mr. Fox In this cult Later. In 1912. the U. .S. Goveminent, acting ion the complaint of the Wnv. Fox attorney, took ecUon. against the PKtenta Co. niid Its allied con- cerns, llie rorent decision by Judge Dickinson, ordering the dissolution of Qie so-called trust, is the result of this action. The case has been .la the courts for nearly tbree yetits, and up to the nresenrt ruling by'Judg^ J)lck- Iieon, lias been stubbonily contested by the d^ fendents. The te.<:tlmony It Is understood, lias been so voluminous on both sides, that It necessitated over elz printed volumes. CO. EXEMPT FROM VERDICT. The HeJles Co., o>Rlng to the natun> of Its de- fense, was not Inchidnl In thr- dbKwlutlon derision. In reference to this .Judge Dlckloqpn 5«ald: 'ISiat all the contraq^ ennmerated In too Gnvern- OCBt^S petition and the c<nnblnatlon therein de- JUDGE DICKINSON ANALYZES DEFEND- ANT'S CONTENTIONS. Regarding the contentions of the defendants and th«ir reasons for forming ~tlie business organiza- tion Iwhlchhe termed In his derision "a conspiracy In' restraint' of- trade," Judge Dickinson gave voice in part'to-the following opinion : "we'would/not be Justillea and .would certainly have' no ;wlsh to deny the pri-eence of the ven landalilermotives, which' defeiidants avow in tlielr aiiBwer. rame of which were to i;ratlfy. the desire allay bickerings, and recriminations among tbem- Bolves, to advance and Improve the. art, to protect the morals of'.the' public, and, as they frankly admit, to make money for tbeTsclves. "Certain it is that the end and purpose, of the plan was to domlnate.and.ccntrnl the trade in all the accessories of the a'rt and. In order to assure this, to control the entire motion picture business. We are driven to. this conclusion not only because that is the plain meaning of, what they did,' bnt also because they themselves cdtegorlcally declare ' the lattex* to-be the impertitlve need of the bifslnoes and one which they alone'could supply,. The-need was for a single (Urectlnc und regulating head.': "Tills extended even to a censorship' of what was shown. 'The United States could not, and. the States -would not. Interpose for the purpose. of regulation, and the defen-lants clakm the .credit of having performed this neglected dntr of the State. In doing all that -was done the defendants not merely deny the illegality of either end or means, bnt also lay claim to commendation. We only men- tion this to make clear the fact tbat they did monopolize, and the only question left is whether tills monopoly Is a lawful monopoly or was accom- plished through an unlawful restraint of trade, we wonid feel ronstralned, on the aathority of this case alone, to find that the agreements and acts of the defendants in the present case went far beyond what was necessary to protect the use of the patents or the monopoly 'which went with them, and that the end and result, which would be expected to be and was accomplished, was the restraint of trade condemned by law." DECISION WILL NOT iERIOUSLY AF- FECT PRESENT FILM SITUATION. The decision by Judge Dickinson, while It may cause considerable change In the future policies of the film, concerns involved, Inclndlng 'Vita, Lu- bln Sellg, Esaanay, Kleina. rathe and Blograph, will not materially alfect the present complexion of the film market. What was aimed at by Wm. Poz In 1911. namely, the "open market," has practically been In effert for the past year and a half, the film concerns nnder fire evidently foi'seelng the outcome of the suit- and ylyelding most of the points involved, ^le principal bone of contention, the f2 license fee, was practically abollebed'over a year ago, and few, if any, picture houses fear to mix their pro- gram' to-day, often sh.inring Mutual, Universal and General in an artistic scramble, apparently wltboat"any danger of disciplinary tactics on the part of the once all powerful Patents Co. and Its chief ally, the General Film. LUBIN CONCEDES GOVERNMENT'S ULTIMATE VICTORY. Slgmnnd Lubln, one of the pioneer mannfnctnr- ero and a defendant named in the suit. It Is said has declared that the Patents Co. and General FUm may not continue the defense any- longer, as In Ub opinion farther opposition 'woold t>e fatUc. Mr. Lubbi, according to a dispatch from the Coast, considers the best way ont Is for the M. P. Patents Co. constituents to rc-adjust themselves to changed conditicns. Tola coarse Mr. Lubln «ald would Involve thr expenditure of millions of dollars, but on the whole diould prove the better way rather than continue the losing' battle. Other officials of the Patents Co., Including President J. J. Ktrimedv, of Genor.il Film, were nsked for an opinion, bat declined to be Interviewed on the snbject, denying themselves to all Interro- gators. FAMOUS P UYERS N EW STUDIO. DITRLAND'S SPACIOVS RHnNG ACADEMY, IN HEART OF NEW YORK, TO BE CO\. 'VEftTEO mUEDIATELiY. Tbo Famous Players' Film Company, has leased, for a number of years, Durland's Hiding Academy, in Flftjr-sixth Street, New York City, which, ac- cording to the terms of the contract signed tbia week. Is Immediately to be turned into a motion picture etudlo. The work of reconstructing tlio building Is alrerdy being poshed with the greatest possible speed In order that the producers ma; begin active work at the earliest moment on the big feature production which they - are contem- plating. The leeslng of this building for motion picture purposes by the Famous I'layers Is the concrete result of that organization's efforts to find within the heart of the city a suitable substitute for tlie Twenty-sixth Street studio which was destroyed by fire o.n the night of SepL 11. DDRI.AKD'8 LENDS ITSELP READILY TO PRODUCER'S PECULIAR REQUIREMENTS. Durland's Is ideally fitted for the requiremeors of the motion picture producer. The huge ridlni; ring, with its high peaked roof, is larger than the drill floor which the Famous Players converted m tbelr own needs in the old Ninth Regiment Ar- mory. The roof being supported entirely by steel girders, spreading from wall to wall, the full sweop of the whole floor Is available for stage purpoi^rs, whlcli makes possible. the presentation of the largest interior scenes that the most spectacular of motion pictures could require. Numerous stalls which line the former arena will be ripped out and the space devoted to the storing of scenery, for which it is Ideally suited. Practically the entire second floor of the bulldlD^ is given over to lockers, dressing rooms and sbownr bauis, which 'will be perfectly adapted to the needs of the stars end'other players. NE'W BUILDING WILL ALSO HOUSE EXECUTI'VE DEPARTMENTS. Formerly the front part of .the tiding academy "was used for offices -and dwelling purposes. This is being renovated to accommoda.te the executive and directorial statt of the flhn producers. The mechanical work on the films themselves, that Is, the developing, printing, assembling and cutting, will not be done In the new building. Immediately after the fire, all this work was transferred to the American Film Laboratory, in Ninetieth Street, of . which Edwin S. Porter, treasurer and general man- ager of the Famous Players MIm Co., is vice presi- dent. -' The old academy wlU be devoted simply to the staging of features and to the executive nee<l3 of the company. The acquiring of the new building will In no wny effect the plans of the company for the erection ot tie largest studio In th» East upon Its newly piir- chssed tract of ground on Marble Hill, New York, where thirty-one city lots are to be devoted to the uses of the producers. A studio at Yonkera. which has served as pro- duction headquarters for the Fnmous Players slnco the destructlo.n of the Twenty-sixth Street bulM; tng, will contlnu-; to serve In that capacity until the completion ot the renovation ot the rldlu? academy. DANICli FROHBOAN PRESENTS Mary Pickford IN A DIFFERENT .OHARACTEBIZATION "A Girt of Yesterday" A NOTEL ROHANOR OF THE PAST AMD THE PRESENT In Four Farts Balassad Oct. 7tlt Prodnced by the FAMOUS m\m FILM CO. ADOLPH zaKOR, Pres. DANIEL FBOUHAN, Managing Director EDWIN S. PORTER, Treas. A Oen. Mgr. ExecDtlveOfflc«s:60T Pltlh Ave., N> Y. Oanadlan dlstrlbntors, famons Players FUm Service, Ltd. CALQARY—HONTRBAL—TORONTO