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 #:
000313
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.

William Felzek, Direct Examination. 291 the Secretary of the company to go and see the other officers of the company and the Executive Committee of the company to get those papers, and then the papers are to be produced by the General Film Company and such officers as produce them will produce them as officers of the General Film Company and not as individuals. I do not agree with counsel for the defendants. These documents are called for as being papers of the corporation and belonging to the corporation, and not to the individuals, and I shall hold the officers responsible to produce them under the decision in the Wilson case, to which I refer counsel in order that they may look up that decision in 221 United States. Mr. Willis: All right, sir. Mr. Caldwell: Mr. Berst is the only member of that committee for whom I have appeared here. Mr. Grosvenor: I understand that counsel having notice of the hearings also have notice of what transpires at the hearings. Mr. Caldwell: I can have Mr. Berst here, I cannot have the others. I have no control over Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Grosvenor: Counsel understands, I hope, that what I want are the papers, not the individuals. Mr. Caldwell: What you have asked for are the individuals. Mr. Grosvenor: I want these papers brought here, and I want the individuals here in case the proper officers do not produce them in order that if I see fit I may cross examine them. Mr. Caldwell: I want you to understand that I have no control over any of these gentlemen except Mr. Berst. Mr. Berst will come if I tell him to; I can't tell Mr. Kennedy to come. Mr. Grosvenor: Mr. Willis has answered for Mr. Kennedy. Thereupon at 12:30 o'clock P. M., on this January the 17th, 1013, the hearing was adjourned until Tuesday morning, until 10 :30 o'clock, January 21st, 1913.