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 000421 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 #:
000421
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.

Agreement, Patents & Gaumoxt Cos. 399 ture Apparatus, granted to American Mutoscope & Biograph Company as the assignee of John A. Pross; No. 744,251, dated November 17, 1903, for Kinetoscope, granted Albert E. Smith; No. 770,937, dated September 27, 1901, for Kinetoscope, granted The Vitagraph Company of America as the assignee of Albert E. Smith; No. 771,280, dated October 4, 1904, for Winding-Reel, granted Albert E. Smith; No. 785,205, dated March 21, 1905, for Flame-Shield for Kinetoscopes, granted The Vitagraph Company of America as the assignee of William Ellwood; and No. 785,237, dated March 21, 1905, for Film-Holder for Kinetoscopes, granted The Vitagraph Company of America as the assignee of Albert E. Smith; all of which said Letters Patent relate to improvements in the motion picture art, and that there are no outstanding licenses, shop rights or other rights under said Letters Patent, or either of them, except a license for Parlor Kinetoscopes granted The Karmata Company, of Washington, D. C, under Letters Patent Nos. 578,185; 580,749; 586,953; and 673,992, and certain alleged licenses under U. S. Letters Patent No. 586,953, which are in dispute, claimed to be owned by the Edison Company and the American Graphaphone Company, of Washington, D. C, and S. Lubin, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and excepting a license granted by the American Mutoscope & Biograph Company to the firm of Marvin & Casler to manufacture and sell cameras and exhibiting or projecting machines under Letters Patent owned by it (some of which are hereinbefore referred to) for use in foreign countries only, and excepting certain licenses granted by the Armat Motion Picture Company to the American Mutoscope & Biograph Company under Letters Patent Nos. 578,185; 580,749; 586,953; 588,916; and 673,992, and by the latter Company to the former Company under Patents Nos. 707,934 and 722,382, which licenses are, however, by agreement between said parties, suspended and are not to be acted upon until the Licensor becomes bankrupt, ceases doing business or shall be dissolved voluntarily or otherwise, or its Charter shall be repealed; and