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 #:
000315
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 H. Swanson, Direct Examination. 293 Thereupon WILLIAM H. SWANSON, the next witness 1 subpoenaed by Petitioner, of lawful age, duly sworn, deposed : Direct examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Mr. Swanson, what is your present occupation? A. I am in the manufacturing, renting and exhibiting of motion pictures. Q. How long have you been engaged in some branch of the motion picture business? A. Since 1896. Q. 1896 or 1906? A. 1896. 2 Q. What was your business then, I mean with what branch of the art were you connected? A. Traveling exhibitor. Q. Did you subsequently organize or establish film exchanges? A. Yes, sir, in Chicago. Q. What was the name of the company? A. William H. Swanson & Company. Q. That company was engaged in the general business of renting films or selling films to the exhibitors, and in supplying them with branch articles, and such other articles as were necessary? A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. Did you after that establish other rental exchanges? A. Yes, sir. I established exchanges in New Orleans, Kansas City, Omaha and St. Louis. Q. Doing the same sort of business? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you continue to carry on that business until the early part of 1909? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Macdonald: I would like to enter the appearance of Macdonald & Bostwick by Dwight Macdonald, counsel for Mr. Rowland, a preferred stockholder. 4 Mr. Grosvenor: Of the General Film Company? Mr. Macdonald: Yes. Mr. Caldwell: Counsel for the General Film Company states that the preferred stockholders of the General Film Company are not parties in this proceeding, and objection is made to any appearance being entered in their behalf. Mr. Grosvenor: Counsel for the Government has no objection to the appearance just entered.