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 000527 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 #:
000527
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 H. Swanson, Cross Examination. 505 gaged in? A. I am in the theatrical business; I am in the film exchange business; I am in the film manufacturing Tmsiness. Q. What do you mean by the theatrical business? A. I own and operate a number of theatres. Q. And where are they located? A. And road shows, travelling shows. Q. Where are your theatres located? A. In Western States. Q. Won't you name them? A. I would rather not. Q. Do you decline to name them? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you exhibit in those theatres moving pictures? A. Some of them. Q. Don't you exhibit moving pictures in all of them at times? A. No, sir. Q. How many theatres do you operate? A. I would rather not say. Q. You decline to state? A. Yes, sir. Q. You have theatres at various points in the West of this country? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you have traveling companies, theatrical companies? A. Just one. Q. That exhibit or perform at the various theatres? A. Not in my theatres, no. Q. Not in your theatres? A. No, sir. Q. The theatrical business of having actors in a company is entirely distinct from the operation of your theatres in the West? A. Positively, yes, sir. My theatrical company never gets beyond the Mississippi River. Q. And your theatres are all beyond the Mississippi? A. Yes, sir. Q. Where is your office? A. In the Mecca Building, 1(>00 Broadway, New York City. Q. Well, have you an office for each one of your three distinct business operations that you have named? A. I have no — the office mentioned in the Mecca Building is not my office. It is the Secretary's office of the Universal Film Manufacturing Company. I am the Secretary. Q. You are the Secretary? A. Yes, sir. The other offices I have are located in El Paso, Denver and Salt Lake City. Q. Did T understand yon correctly to say that you