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 000132 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 #:
000132
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.

750 William H. Swanson, Cross Examination. trouble with the bookkeepers? A. I had had trouble with the bookkeepers all the time. Q. Has that changed since the last hearing? A. Still have it with the bookkeepers. They are a wonderful lot of fellows. The number of customers in the Chicago office, if I remember correctly, was at the time, 480 or 490. There was so many that when I told Mr. Waters about it, he said he did not think it was possible. But I remember there were quite a number. Q. Did you say in your direct examination that you recalled thirty-three suits brought against Kleine by the Edison interests? A. Not against Kleine. No. Mr. Grosvenor: Against Kleine and his exihibitors? The Witness : Not against Kleine and his exhibitors. No, sir. Kleine was not interested in those suits at all. Q. Were you asked this question on your direct examination, at page 315 : "Q. Do you recall any suits being brought against Kleine or any of Kleine's customers in the year 1908? A. I recall about thirty. Between 30 and 33 suits, that were brought in Chicago against exhibitors that were using his goods, by representatives of the Edison interests." A. That is my answer, yes. Q. Then you do recall thirty-three suits brought against Kleine and Kleine's customers? A. Not against Kleine. Just Kleine's customers. Q. Kleine and Kleine's customers, you said? A. I beg your pardon. I did not interpret it that way. Q. At any rate, you recall thirty-three suits against his exhibitors? A. Somewhere in that neighborhood, yes. Q. You were one of the prime movers, were you not, in forming the Film Service Association? A. Yes, sir. Q. And that could only handle Edison goods? By that I mean the goods of the Edison licensees? A. No, we had no reference to what goods you would use, but to license the exchange. Q. What film could the Film Service Association members use? Give me a general term for it? A. Well, what we used to term "Association film." Q. "Association film?" A. Yes.