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 #:
000433
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.

A. J. Clapham, Cross Examination. 1051 It has been a hope of mine during the past year that I could eliminate the jealous feeling that exists amongst the various exchanges here, and while Mr. Kleine was visiting the coast last year we arranged a little social gathering each week, but these meetings grew to be of such a character that it was deemed advisable to discontinue them. I have no hesitation in stating that a circular letter sent to the various theatres in the state, inquiring into the matter of first-class service and good treatment, that the Theatre Film Service Company would get more than its share of supporters. As an illustration of the methods adopted by one concern here in the city, which also has a New York office, I would cite the following method of their obtaining business: their office manager equipped himself with a complete assortment of newspaper clippings regarding my domestic difficulties, and while calling upon the various theatres throughout the state shows them to our customers in an effort to influence them to leave our service. Another illustration of their antagonism is the fact that one employe whom I discharged for dishonesty the early part of last year made application to them for a position, and they rang me up over the telephone and asked me as to his character. I informed them in confidence that he was discharged for dishonesty, and they immediately engaged the man. This is in keeping with their general method of competition for business here. It is extremely annoying to me to be compelled to notice these unscrupulous attacks, and nothing would please me better than to have you make a careful investigation of any complaints that might be made against this office; in fact, I think if a representative of the Patents Company were to make a visit to this city for the purpose of investigating conditions, it might probably result in a demand for explanations regarding the acts of other exchanges. Regarding the sale of film, I wrote the Patents Company a letter last spring or summer to the effect that an exchange in this city had sold outright forty reels of film, to be shipped to New Zealand. I was in a position to furnish convincing proof in this matter, inasmuch as the party who purchased this film bought a machine from us and brought the film down in a trunk to our place of busi