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 00049 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 2
Leaf #:
00049
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 Fox, Direct Examination. 667 as near as you can recollect? A. He said, "Fox, I have sent * for you." Mr. Kingsley : Who said this? The Witness : Mr. Waters. "I have sent for you and my object in sending for you, is to tell you that in my opinion this would be the very best time for you to sell your plant to the General Film Company, as you are no doubt aware that we have all of the business now." I said, "Waters, I do not want to sell my business. I am getting along all right. My plant is earning from f 60,000 to $75,000 a year, and I 2 would rather not sell." "Well," he said, "Fox, you know that I have alwavs been friendly with you, and I am willing to give you my best advice and then you can do as you think best," He said, "You know, you have stayed in business a good long time. Everybody else is out, and you are still in, and if I were you, at this time, I would sell out and be done with it." I said, "Waters, look here, I no more want to sell this business than fly off the roof. A plant that earns from $60,000 to $75,000 a year and goes along without much bother and without much trouble and without much risk, is ~ worth anywhere from $600,000 to $750,000 on a ten per cent, basis. I don't suppose your General Film Company is going to pay that kind of a price, and without that kind of a price, I don't want to sell." Q. Then did he say anything further about the question of selling out? A. He said, "Fox, now if you don't offei your plant to-day, you might not get another chance. Now, if I were you — that is all I can say to you. I am not going to talk any plainer. You can understand what I mean. Now, don't press me and don't walk out and later say that I did not try to treat you fair. I cannot talk any plainer than I am to 4 vou now. I would advise von to sell, and I don't mind telling you if you don't sell now, you shall not have another chance to sell." I said, "Now, Waters, let us see just what you mean by that. Am I to infer that if I do not sell my business to the General Film Company that you are going to cancel my license and that I am going to be put out of business as you have done to a good many others?" "Well," he said, "I did not say that. All I can tell you is that you ought to sell." I said, "Now, look here, Waters, if you pretend you have got all of this friendship for me, I think I do understand what