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 #:
000450
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:
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.

428 Louis Bosenbluh, Direct Examination. supply one account at the same time. I maintain that there is another violation. Q. In these instances that you have mentioned, did different branches of the General Film Company supply the same exhibitor? A. Yes, sir. Bulletin No. 10 provides for that. Q. Bulletin No. 10 is printed in the record, page 71, also Bulletin No. 22, page 76 of the record, Petitioner's Exhibit No. 25, says: "The licenses of the following exchanges have been cancelled for supplying licensed films to exhibitors whose royalties have not been forwarded to this Company, for exchanging films and for failure to take proper precautions to prevent licensed films from passing into the hands of unlicensed persons : Miles Brothers, Incorporated, at Baltimore, Maryland; Imperial Film Exchange at New York, Troy, New York, Washington, D. G." That is the same thing? That matter of exchanging film to which you refer? A. Yes, sir. It has also another effect. The fact that they can interchange the film does not require each exchange to expend all the money that is necessary to buy the complete output, which gives them an advantage of regulating their prices for the supply of the service. Q. That is, if the exchange has obtained a reel, and none of its exhibitor customers needs that reel for a certain day, it might loan it to another exchange for use by a customer of the other exchange, is that what you mean? A. Correct. Q. Before the formation of the Patents Company, state whether or not it was the fact that George Kleine had compiled a catalogue or a book with lists of titles of films, and that was issued to the trade, so that the different exchanges might order from the catalogue such films as they desired. Is that correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. State whether or not it is possible for any exchange today to go to any house, or place of doing business and find any catalogue of films, and order such films as it may desire. A. I don't know of any concern. It would be impractical under the present rulings of the manufacturers to return films, and to make up subjects at a loss would be impractical, as films are continuously taken out of stock and returned. Q. Under present conditions, there is no place where a rental exchange or an exhibitor can go and look at a long list of titles and order such as he desires, is that right? A. Yes, sir. Q. His supply is limited to the weekly productions,