In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants (1913)

Record Details:

Title:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants
Date:
1913
Publisher:
New York, Appeal Printing Co.
Volume:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants : record volume 1
Leaf #:
00031
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
The Museum of Modern Art Library, New York
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
These seven volumes contain the testimonies and supporting documents from the U.S. District Court's antitrust lawsuit against the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC). Formed in 1908, the MPPC (sometimes referred to asœ"the Edison Trust" or just "the Trust") sought to control the American film industry through pooling patents and demanding that producers and exhibitors acquire licenses to those patents. Independent producers and exhibitors, who refused to license the patents, argued that the MPPC was an unlawful monopoly. In 1912 and 1913, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania heard testimonies from both MPPC members, such as Siegmund Lubin, and "Independents" who later became Hollywood moguls, such as William Fox. Ultimately, in 1915, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which found the MPPC in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and spelled the end for the already weakening MPPC. -- Eric Hoyt, 2012
Date Added:
September 21, 2023
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.

Harry N. Marvin, Direct Examination. 9 sociation, or took out these licenses? Your company did not? A. No, it did not. I believe those who took licenses from the Edison Company at that time were the Vitagraph Company, S. Lubin, Kalem Company, G. Melies, Essanay Company, Selig Polyscope Company, and Pathe Freres, I believe, took a license sometime later. Q. That left in the field as opposed to the so-called Edison licensees, your company, the Biograph Company, and George Kleine, who was importing films, is that not correct? A. Yes, they took no licenses. There were others whom I have mentioned, who did not take any licenses. Q. In the year 1908, or rather in the latter part of 1907, there was also formed an association called the Film Service Association, being an association of rental exchanges? A. I understand such an association existed about that time, but I have practically no knowledge of it. Q. Well, from your knowledge of the business you knew or had information that there was in existence such an organization, did you not? A. That was my impression. Q. You went to one or two of the meetings of that association in the year 1907? A. No. Q. During which the formation of the association was considered? A. I never attended any meeting of the Film Service Association. Q. The larger proportion of these rental exchanges joined this Film Association, did they not? A. I do not know that any rental exchanges joined any film association. You mean Film Service Association? Q. Yes. A. Oh, yes, I think that the larger part of exchanges were members of that association. Q. And that association, or the members of it, entered into an exchange or license agreements with the Edison Company at the time the Edison licensees formed their association? A. I have no knowledge of that whatever. Q. Who was the Secretary of the Film Service Association? A. I don't know — Dwight McDonald? Q. Dwight McDonald? A. I think a man named McDonald was Secretary at one time. Q. Who became general manager of the Motion Picture Patents Company when it was formed? A. Yes, acting manager. Q. Now, in 1908 there was after the formation of this association of Edison licensees, very vigorous competition