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 2
Leaf #:
000356
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:
June 13, 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.

974 Thomas H. Bates, Direct Examination. The Witness : I said, "Would you deprive my children of the necessities of life?" "I don't care about that," he said. Mr. Kingsley: I object to any conversation that the witness may have had with Mr. Marston, as it is not shown that he is a representative of the Motion Picture Patents Company in Boston or anywhere else. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Go ahead. A. I then went to the Pastime Theatre. I first went home and I told my wife — Q. (interrupting) : You can leave out what you did at home. A. Wre went to the Pastime Theatre, and I tried to get an engagement there. He said to me, "Well," he said, "I saw the picture at the Premier Theatre, and I would like to engage it, but," he said, "we could not do it," he said. "We are using the trust companies' pictures, and if we did, they would take their pictures out of the house." He said, "I cannot use your pictures." I said, "Is that the reason?" He said, "Yes, that is the reason. I have got nothing against the picture at all." We then went to the Unique Theatre, and I called the manager aside, and I said, "I would like to get an engagement for my picture." He said, "Well, I will tell you. I cannot engage you, because we are using the trust companies' pictures," and he said, "we are stopped from using any pictures not made by the trust." He said, "I could not give you an engagement," I said, "Would you be willing to sign a statement to that effect, that if it were not that the trust objects to the use of an independent picture going into the theatre, that you would be willing to use my picture?" He said, "I would be perfectly willing to sign a statement to that effect if the other managers using the trust companies' pictures would do the same." I left him at that. I then went to the Huntington Avenue Theatre, Mr. Jones, and I asked him for an engagement. He said, "Well, come around tomorrow and I will see what I can do." I came around the next day, and we had a talk. He said, "Look here, just let me think it over for another day." I came around the next day. He said, "I cannot use your picture," I said, "Why?" "Because," he said, "Mr. Mars