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 #:
00080
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.

58 Harry N. Marvin, Direct Examination. Western Film Exchange, 919 Century Building, St. Louis, Mo. Western Film Exchange, 307 Grand Avenue, Milwaukee, Wis. Western Film Exchange. 201 Miners' Bank Building, Joplin, Mo. Wonderland Film Exchange, Seventh Street and Liberty Avenue, Pittsburg, Pa. Wheelan-Loper Film Co., 339 Main Street, Dallas, Texas. Yale Film Kenting Co., 622 Main Street, Kansas City, Mo. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. This Exhibit No. 13, dated February 21th, 1909, was a notice sent out by you giving what were the Licensed Film Exchanges, is that not correct? A. Yes. Q. Are there any on this list, comprising 11G exchanges, that are licensed by the Patents Company today? A. No. They have been superseded by branches of the General Film Company. Q. That is to say, the General Film Company succeeded to the business of nearly all of these companies? A. Well, the General Film Company is serving a majority of the customers that wrere served by those exchanges when they were doing business. Q. Well, that is not the question I asked. The General Film Company is now doing the business which was done by the major part of these 116 exchanges? A. Well, if my former answer is not a reply, then I will say it was not doing that business. Q. How many of these 116 exchanges were acquired by the General Film Company? A. I believe they acquired property from 57 different exchanges. Q. And the General Film Company was organized, was it not, by these licensed manufacturers, that is, the Patents Company licensees? A. Yes. {}. And the Patents Company also licensed the manufacturers of moving picture machines, did it not? A. It licensed a number of such manufacturers. Q. Is this the list, contained on this circular of yours of February 27, 1909, of the manufacturers of projecting ma