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 #:
000622
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.

59G Gov't Ex. 134, Agt. Edison & Eastman Kodak Cos. of the Eastman Compaq having knowledge of the facts therein set forth (if the Patents Company shall so request) showing the total amount in running feet of such "N. I. Licensed Film'' and said other film, shipped by it to all the "Patents Company licensees'1 and said other persons, firms and corporations (other than the ex-licensees and non-licensed "foreign manufacturers'' just referred to) and paid for by them, during the preceding year, including in such account and statement, during the continuance of the aforesaid agreement of January 1, 1909, such film having a nitrocellulose base as may have been shipped to and paid for by the "Patents Company licensees" and said other persons, firms and corporations to whom it has been charged and from whom it has collected the royalty provided for in said agreement, said agreement being modified to this extent ; but it is further mutually covenanted and agreed that the dealings between the Eastman Company and the "Patents Company licensees'' shall, — from the date hereof, insofar as the number of running feet or anything that would tend to disclose the number of running feet shipped to or ordered by them, is concerned, — be a matter of confidence, even to the exclusion of the Patents Company, between such licensees and such other person, firm or corporation, as aforesaid, and the Eastman Company, and the latter shall not be at liberty* to disclose, directly or indirectly, to the Patents Company or to any of the "Patents Company licensees" the number of such running feet of film so ordered by or shipped to any of the "Patents Company licensees," or such other persons, firms and corporations other than ex-licensees and non-licensed "foreign manufacturers" just referred to, and it is therefore mutually covenanted and agreed that all statements and payments of royalty from the Eastman Company to the Patents Company shall be in gross, without specifying the number of running feet of film, either by a statement of the number of running feet or the amount of royalties charged lo and collected for or on account thereof. 20. It is further mutually covenanted and agreed by and between the Patents Company and the Eastman Company, that if, notwithstanding the statements made by the Eastman Company to the Patents Company, the latter should be desirous of satisfying itself by having an examination made of the books of the Eastman Company as to the accuracy of