The Exhibitor (Nov 1938-May 1939)

EDITORIAL THE NATIONAL Vol. 17, No. 15 Feb. 22, 1939 A Jay Emanuel Publication. Circulating in Maryland, District of Columbia, Delaware, Virginia, Eastern West Virginia. Covering the film territory served out of Washington, D. C. Published weekly by Jay Emanuel Publications, Incorporated. Publishing office: 1225 Vine Street, Philadelphia. New York City office: 1600 Broadway. West Coast office: 1119 Poinsettia Drive, Hollywood, California. Jay Emanuel, publisher; Paul J. Greenhalgh, advertising manager; Herbert M. Miller, managing editor. Subscription rates: $2 for one year; $5 for three years. Member of the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Publisher also of The Philadelphia Exhibitor and The New York State Exhibitor. Address all communications to the Philadelphia office. JUST IN PASSING GOOD NEWS ON "GOOD NEWS” Naturally, William S. Rodgers, Metro sales chief, would have been the man to announce officially that Metro-GoldwynMayer was withdrawing its radio show, "Good News,” from the air late in the spring. Bill Rodgers has slowly moved into a premiere spot as a man in whom the independent exhibitors of the country have a lot of confidence, and this action is entirely in line with the policy he has pursued — to play fair. This marks the second change of studio policy (Tyrone Power’s withdrawal by 20th Century-Fox was the first) and regardless of what else may have motivated the action, the exhibitors should be grateful that the ball has started to roll. It is now up to exhibitors to keep it rolling. TO FRANK J. A. McCARTHY If the drive honoring Universal eastern division manager Frank J. A. McCarthy and western chief W. J. Heineman does not turn out to be a record breaker, please direct all finger pointing at us. Universal is honoring sales chief Bill Scully’s aides with a play date and charges drive February 26-April 22, which is all the information exhibitors need to give the utmost co-operation. Naturally, covering the East as we do, we favor the East’s chances and we are betting on Frank McCarthy, a modest, enthusiastic, clear thinking, capable executive, with a host of friends throughout the territory. He deserves co-operation. IMPORTANT: THE TEXAS DECISION Important Enough to grace the front pages of most of the dailies of our land, important enough to catch the eye of every industry member, the action of the U. S. Supreme Court by a five-to-three verdict in upholding charges of violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law through restrictions in Texas and New Mexico is of tremendous importance. The ruling was especially newsworthy since it comes at a time when the administration is pushing its anti-monopoly policies against big companies. In Approving an anti-trust decree issued by a Northern Texas Federal District Court against eight majors, Interstate Circuit, Inc., Texas Consolidated Theatres, Inc., Karl Hoblitzelle, R. J. O’Donnell, operating these circuits, the court held that restrictions as to price and twin bills were "harsh and arbitrary.” The court said that "an agreement illegal because it suppresses competition is not any less so because the competitive article is copyrighted. The fact that the restraint is made easier or more effective by making the copyright subservient to the contract does not relieve it of its illegality.” It held further that the effect of the contracts "was a drastic suppression of competition and oppressive price maintenance, of benefit to Interstate and the distributors but injurious alike to Interstate’s subsequentrun competitors and to the public.” The Dissenting Opinion stated that any conclusion of a conspiracy either between the distributors or between them and Interstate was unjustified. It stated that the agreements were not conspiracies contemplated by the Sherman act and the holding that they are goes far beyond anything the court has ever decided. The Dissenting Opinion also stressed the protection of the copyright laws as applied to films. It declared that exhibition of film without copyright laws "would amount to a public disclosure and the use of the material would be open to the public,” stating that owners of copyrighted films should have control over their use. In View of the present goings-on within the industry and the government suit against the distributors, what has been said above is No. 1 legal stuff. Undoubtedly, it will also not go unnoticed by attorneys for the various companies who may have be<Ai of the opinion that allowing similar disputes to get into court is the best policy. Arbitration was and is still the best policy. NAT