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 #:
000627
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
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 21, 2023
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.

Gov't Ex. 134, Agt. Edison & Eastman Kodak Cos. G01 each installment of said twenty-four per cent. (24%) of said gross royalties or rents provided for in this paragraph after receiving the same, and after the same have been so apportioned, without disclosing, directly or indirectly, to the Patents Company or to any of the "Patents Company licensees1' the share apportioned or paid to any of such licensees; that the Patents Company shall furnish to the Eastman Company a statement of the number of thousand running feet of such film of a greater width than approximately one (1) inch having positive motion pictures thereon imported by all the "Patents Company licensees'' during the period for which each said installment is paid to the Eastman Company, in order that the said apportionment may be made. 24. That in case the Eastman Company should be, at any time during the continuance of this agreement, wholly or partly unable to supply the "Patents Company licensees" with "X. I. Licensed Film," then and in such case the number of running feet of film which the "Patents Company licensees" shall, during and to the extent of such inability, necessarily obtain from other manufacturers designated by the Patents Company, shall be ascertained by the Patents Company, and reported by it to the Eastman Company who shall add it to the film actually shipped by it to such "Patents Company licensees" and paid for by them for the purpose of adjusting the rates of royalty provided for in paragraph 17 and making the apportionment, provided for in paragraph 23. 25. That in case the Eastman Company fails, and continues to fail for a period of twenty (20) days, to supply "N. I. Licensed Film" in the quantities required by the "Patents Company licensees," for actual use in the manufacture, in the "territory aforesaid," of motion pictures, the Patents Company may designate some other manufacturer or manufacturers of film from whom the "Patents Company licensees" may then purchase non-inflammable "Licensed Film" to complete their immediate requirements, month by month only, until such time as the Eastman Company can supply said film; but if the Eastman Company should fail for a continuous period of one hundred and twenty days io furnish such "N. I. Licensed Film" to the "Patents