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 #:
000632
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.

606 Gov't Ex. 134, Agt. Edison & Eastman Kodak Cos. licenses, shop rights, or other rights under said letters patent, or either of them, except a license for Parlor Kinetoscopes 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, and excepting a license granted by the American Mutoscope & Biograph Company to the firm of Marvin and 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 letters patent Nos. 707,934 and 722,382, which licenses, however, are by agreement between said parties, suspended and are not to be acted upon until the Patents Company becomes bankrupt, ceases doing business or shall be dissolved, voluntarily or otherwise, or its Charter shall be repealed; and 3. WHEREAS, the Patents Company further represents that it is the owner of all the right, title and interest in and to reissued letters patent of the United States No. 12,037, dated September 30, 1902, and No. 12,192, dated January 12, 1904, the original letters patent whereof are No. 589,168 and dated August 31, 1897, and that there are no outstanding licenses, shop rights or other rights under said reissued letters patent, or either of them, except license agreements thereunder between the Edison Company and Pathe Freres, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey and having an office at Jersey City, in said State, dated May 20, 1908, (which went into effect June 20, 1908), and between the Edison Company and the Kalem Company, of New York; the Essanay Company, of Chicago, Illinois; Siegmund Lubin, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; George Melies Company, of said Chicago; the Selig Polyscope Company, of said Chicago, and The Vitagraph Company of America, of New York, all dated January 31, 1908; and 4. WITEKEAS, the Patents Company further represents that it has licensed each of the parties to the license agree