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 #:
000471
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:
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.

William Devery, Redirect Examination. 1089 sonally connected with the place. In fact, I know very 1 little about the picture business. Q. Did you run a special feature known as "The United States Military Tournament" picture sometime in August? A. I think possibly I did; I am not certain. Q. And that was an unlicensed motion picture? A. We ran several unlicensed pictures. Thereupon, WILLIAM DEVERY resumed the stand. By Mr. Grosvenor: 2 Q. Mr. Devery, you stated to me a moment ago that you had returned here, and desired to submit a letter which you felt would supplement some of your testimony that you gave on redirect examination. Is this the letter? A. Yes. Q. Is that the letter to which you referred on your cross examination yesterday, Mr. Devery? A. Yes, sir, it is. Mr. Grosvenor: I offer that letter in evidence. Mr. Kingsley: I object to this letter as incom g petent, immaterial, irrelevant, and as not binding upon any of the defendants herein, and as being a matter wholly personal between the Imperial Film Exchange and its owners, and MacDonald & Bostwick, their attorneys. Petitioner's Exhibit No. 202. MACDONALD & BOSTWICK Counselors at Law 4 15 William Street, New York. (Officers listed.) April 18, 191Q Imperial Film Exchange, 44 West 28th Street, New York, N. Y. Dear Sirs: With reference to the situation which necessarily arises