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 000396 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 #:
000396
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.

1014 Thomas H. Bates, Cross Examination. forbidden the benefit of engagements in theatres where your pictures were in use, notwithstanding I had the written assurance, witnessed, of managers of theatres who were anxious to engage my picture, but dare not because of Marston's threat. Remember I have their statements in writing and shall give them to the United States Attorney General, to be used by him against you. Mr. Marston declared he would not let me use three feet of moving picture of my little boy, the "Baby Hercules of the World," — not even if I starved — this in the presence of my wife in his sales room. I have the written letters of several managers as proof, as well as witnesses that they would employ me only for Marston. I regret I have to write you in this vein, because I believe could I have dealt with some affable and diplomatic person, vested with authority from you, the necessity would never have arisen to do so. Respectfully yours, THOMAS H. BATES. Rubber Stamp Received 1912 Aug 19 AM 9 08 Ans. 8/26/12 H. N. M. A. C. L. File, J. B. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. I show you a letter dated August 26, 1912, addressed to you, and ask you if you received such a letter? A. I did. The Attorney General has the original of that letter. Mr. Kingsley: I offer it in evidence. The paper offered in evidence by counsel for defendants was marked by the Examiner "Defendants* Exhibit No. 16" and is as follows: