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 #:
000666
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.

640 Gov't Ex. 135, Agt. Edison & Eastman Kodak Cos. graph numbered la of this agreement, or for any failure to supply such film, having a nitrocellulose base, in quantities required by the Vendee in the Vendee's aforesaid business, by circumstances or happenings beyond the control of the Vendor. 3b. That in case the Vendor fails and continues to fail for a period of twenty (20) days to supply its sensitized motion picture film, having a nitrocellulose base, in the quantities required by the Vendee for the Vendee's aforesaid business, then the Vendee may purchase such film from other manufacturers to complete the Vendee's immediate requirements, month by month only, until such time as the Vendor can supply said film. If, however, the Vendor si) on Id fail for a continuous period of one hundred and twenty (120) days to furnish its said film to the Vendee in the quantities required by the Vendee for the Vendee's aforesaid business (provided such quantities do not exceed 25 per cent, more than the Vendee has received from the Vendor during a similar period immediately preceding said one hundred and twenty (120) days, then the Vendee shall have the right to terminate this agreement by giving thirty (30) days' notice in writing to the Vendor of its election so to do. 3c. That the Vendor may reduce the prices provided for in paragraphs lb and lc, if it should consider it commercially desirable to do so, but if the Vendor reduces the prices provided for in paragraph lb it may make a corresponding reduction in the prices provided for in paragraph lc, and if it reduces the prices provided for in paragraph lc it shall make a corresponding reduction of the prices provided for in paragraph lb, except as provided for in paragraph 3d. 3d. That the Vendor is to have the privilege of selling in countries foreign to the United States such sensitized motion picture film, having a nitrocellulose base, in lengths less than one hundred (100) feet or thirty (30) metres, or such film inferior to the average quality heretofore supplied by it to its customers, for special purposes, at prices below those provided for in paragraph lc, and without making a corresponding reduction of the prices provided