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 #:
000123
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:
May 23, 2024
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.

Bulletins to Exhibitors. 101 fee in every case in order to meet the preliminary expense of organization, etc. As soon as we have completed the very difficult task of licensing the several thousand theatres using our licensed film we shall adjust the royalties to be paid after March 8th so that the smallest licensed theatres will pay a royalty of f 1 a week, or less, the average licensed theatres $2 a week, and the largest and more prosperous theatres more in proportion to make an average of as nearly as practical $2 a week for all of our licensed theatres. We are of the opinion that the licensed film will satisfy the public demand in the future as it has during the past year, and for that reason, we are willing to let the entire proposition rest upon the merit of the licensed service. The licensed exhibitor is not bound to us for even a single day and he may, at his own option, discontinue the licensed service and upon doing so he is relieved from every obligation assumed, and he puts himself in exactly the same position that he was in before he paid his license fee and was accepted by us as a licensed theatre. We call attention to this fact because there has been some misapprehension among exhibitors who have the idea that they are giving up some rights, or are assuming obligations, when they accept our license. We do not desire to interfere with the business of the theatres and we only propose to license those theatres which are desirable and where it is believed that our service is demanded by the moving picture public patronizing the theatre. As to your machines particularly, we wish to make it clear that a licensed theatre may use any machine or machines which were purchased before February 1, 1909, if they are used in exhibiting our licensed pictures. Machines which are purchased from the Manufacturers after February 1, 1909, if they are to be used in a licensed theatre must bear the license plate of the Patents Company. We enclose a list of our licensed exchanges and refer you to anyone of them for fuller information if desired, and we also suggest that should this letter not answer your communication to us fully we will be very glad to have you address us a second time. Yours very truly, MOTION PICTURE PATENTS COMPANY, By D. Macdonald, General Manager.