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 #:
000312
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.

290 William Pelzer, Direct Examination. tiations for the Turner & Dalmkeii Exchange, San Francisco, Calif, were closed, and that the proprietors had agreed to sell their business to this company. Mr. Kennedy also made a general statement of the work accomplished by the various branch managers and stated that where good results had been obtained the salaries of managers were increased. In this connection Mr. Kennedy also suggested that the salary of the General Manager be increased to $300.00 per week, and on motion, duly seconded, and on the affirmative vote of each director present, the salary of the General Manager was increased to $300.00 per week, the same to take effect immediately. There being no further business before the meeting an adjournment was taken until Monday, September 11th, 1911, 2 P. M., at No. 80 Fifth Avenue. Attest : Wm. Pelzer, Secretary. President. Mr. Willis: You have given notice to the counsel for the defendants to produce at the next sitting on Tuesday, the members of the Executive Committee of the General Film Company, together with such memoranda or minutes that may be in existence having reference to their business conduct as such Executive Committee. Representing Mr. Kennedy, we will be very glad to comply with that notice provided that it shall have the same effect as though you had a regular subpoena duces tecum issued and served upon him. With that understanding we shall make every effort to give you every facility in that report. Mr. Grosvenou: Mr. Telzer, you understand that my request of you to produce these papers is addressed to you in your capacity as Treasurer of the company, and you are to direct the Secretary of the company to facilitate you in the search for these papers and documents; and you are to direct