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 000345 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 #:
000345
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.

William EL Swanson, Direct Examination. 323 purchased machines in lots of 100, 150 and 200 at a time. Q. Were you acquainted with the prices quoted with Eastman on raw film prior to 1908, and after the Patents Company was formed? A. Yes, sir. Q. What change was there in their price? A. I used to pay three cents a foot for it before the Fatents Company was formed. I pay 3 and five-eighths cents a foot for it now, which is one-eighth of a cent more than the Patents Company pay. Q. Mr. Swanson, you had conversations at various times with Mr. Dyer and the other organizers of the Patents Company in regard to trade conditions and changes in trade conditions during the years 1908 and 1909? A. Yes, sir. Q. And about the license agreements and 1 he character of the persons that they should be issued to? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you recall whether or not at any time Mr. Dyer stated that licenses should not be issued to certain members based on their faith or nationality? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Williams : We object to that as leading. That is the limit on a leading question. Q. Please state to the best of your recollection what, if anything, was said in that connection by Mr. Dyer. A. Mr. Dyer remarked to me on a number of different occasions that there would not be any room in the moving picture business for the Jews, if they could prevent it, the Edison Company as well as the Motion Picture Patents Company. Q. Did any of the other organizers of the Patents Company at any time make the same statement to you? A. In conversations with Mr. Spoor and Mr. Selig, that was frequently discussed. I asked them what they were going to do with Mr. Lubin and Mr. Selig, thinking, as I did, that Mr. Selig was of the Jewish faith. They said they were going to dispose of Lubin in their own way, that is, that Mr. Lubin would be disposed of eventually, but they did not know just exactly how it was to be done. The Examiner: The hearing is adjourned until to-morrow morning at 10:30 A. M. Thereupon, on this Tuesday, the 21st day of January, 1913, the hearing in this case is adjourned to Wednesday, January 22nd, 1913, at the Hotel McAlpin.