Start Over

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 000401 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 #:
000401
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.

Charles W. Boyer, Direct Examination. 1019 sure you do not approve of this and write to you a concise 1 statement of the case." Is that the reason you sent the letter to this company? A. That is the reason. CHARLES W. BOYER, a witness subpoenaed on behalf of the petitioner, being first duly sworn by the Examiner, testified as follows : Direct examination by Mr. Grosvenor : Q. Where do you reside? A. Hagerstown, Maryland. Q. Do you have certain theatres or did you have in the latter part of 1912, in the City of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania? A. I had two theatres, yes, in Chambersburg. Q. Two moving picture theatres? A. Yes. They were two regular theatres. Not exclusively moving pictures, but played pictures on all my off nights. Q. What were the names of those theatres? A. One was the New Theatre, the other the Rosedale Theatre. Q. Were there any other theatres in your town that displayed motion pictures? A. Yes. A third theatre, called the Star Theatre. Q. What projecting machines did you use in your two theatres at that time? A. We used an Edison in the Rosedale, and a Powers in the New Theatre. Q. And each of those projecting machines were manufactured by the licensed manufacturers, or don't you know anything about that? A. I suppose they were. I am not familiar with that. Q. I show you a letter dated December 23rd, 1912, and ask you whether that is the letter received by you from the Patents Company about the time stated on the letter (handing paper to witness). A. (witness examining paper) : Yes. Mr. Grosvenor : I offer it in evidence. The paper offered is marked Petitioner's Exhibit 182, and is as follows: