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)

Page scan 000310 from 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 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 #:
000310
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Early Cinema
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 12, 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.

3 '2$8 William Pelzer, Direct Examination. kee, Wis., and Indianapolis, Ind., and an Auxiliary branch at Jacksonville, Florida. The President called attention to the conditions of the iilni rental business in the state of Texas and advocated the opening of one or more branch exchanges in that state. On motion, duly seconded, the officers of the company were authorized to organize a local company under the laws of the State of Texas with a capital stock not over $20,000, to conduct one or more film exchanges in that State, and to take such further action as may be necessary to start the business of such local company. There being no further business, the meeting on motion, duly seconded, adjourned. Attest : Wm. Pelzer, Secretary. President. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Those minutes state that Mr. Kennedy made a general report on the business of the company since the last meeting. I wish you would produce Mr. Pelzer, a copy of that report? A. My recollection is that that was a general verbal statement of the business situation. I think you will find that at a number of meetings the same statement is made that is, he would make verbal reports. Q. Will you look up and see what reports have been made by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors during those years? A. Written reports? Q. Yes, written reports, and produce those also on Tuesday — any reports made by the Executive Committee to the Board of Directors? A. I do not recall any, and T might say right now, that I do not recall any written reports, other than upon the figures you have been reading. Q. Please produce all such reports, they may not all be copied here. I want the original report. A. Yes, sir. Q. Also any individual reports that may have been