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 #:
000507
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:
September 21, 2023
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.

Hector J. Streyckmans, Cross Examination. 1125 been a competitor of the licensees of the Patents Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Either as an investor, owning an interest in the business, or as an employee? A. Yes, sir. Q. And at the present time you are allied with the Mutual Film Corporation, which is a competitor of the General Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. And has been for some time? A. For about a year. Q. Were you ever connected with the Independent Moving Picture Company of America? A. No, sir. Q. Do you recall that there was a lawsuit between the Motion Picture Patents Company and the Independent Moving Picture Company of America? A. I do. Q. And did you make an affidavit in that suit on behalf of the defendant? A. Yes, sir. Q. And in that affidavit you set out certain conversations that you had with Mr. Kleine? A. Yes, sir. Q. And with whom else? A. Mr. Dyer, I believe. Q. In that affidavit you set out certain conversations which you had with Mr. Kleine and Mr. Dyer? A. Mr. George Spoor, and Mr. W. N. Selig. Q. And the answer to the question, then, is, "Yes?" A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you testified in any other suits against the Motion Picture Patents Company? A. I don't recall whether I made an affidavit, or gave a deposition, in the suit of the Patents Company against my own company, which was brought in Chicago, but never came to trial because the company failed — I remember having conversations with Mr. Wilkerson, who was then our attorney. Q. And that you do not recall? A. No, I do not recall whether I made an affidavit in that suit. That company went out of business, and the litigation died. Q. Your company was in litigation with the Patents Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. And that was? A. The International Projecting & Producing Company.