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 #:
000508
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.

1126 J. M. Ensor, Direct Examination. Thereupon, J. M. ENSOR, a witness subpoenaed on behalf of the petitioner, of lawful age, duly sworn, deposed as follows: Direct examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Mr. Ensor, where do you reside? A. I am at Little Bock, Arkansas, at present. Q. In 1909, and 1910, where were you residing and engaged in business? A. Denver, Colorado. Q. What was your business in Denver, Colorado, in those years? A. I had what was known as the "Colorado Film Exchange'' — we rented films and sold machines and all kinds of supplies to the theatres. Q. Was your company, the Colorado Film Exchange, a member of the Film Service Association? A. We had a contract with the Patents Company. Q. You took out a contract with the Patents Company after that company was organized? A. Yes, sir, but we had been buying films all the time from Kleine, and Selig, and Lubin, and all of them before. Q. What manufacturers were you buying films from in the years 1908 and 1909? A. I was not with the Film Exchange in 1908, but I know what they were buying. Q. What were they buying, whose films were they geting in 1909? A. Buying just the same that went into the Patents Company. Q. Name them? A. Selig, Kleine, Essanay, Vitagraph, Lubin, Pathe Freres, Urban Eclipse, and Gaumont. Q. Were these films shipped from the several factories to Denver, Colorado, to your place of business? A. Yes, sir; they were shipped to their agents; they had agents, they didn't come from the factories, but they had agents to supply us. Q. They came from other States than Colorado? A. Yes, sir, came from other States than Colorado. Q. Then, during the years 1909, and 1910, your company did business under a so-called license with the Patents Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. How many film exchanges were there in 1909, and 1910, in Denver, Colorado? A. Three. Q. Please name the three exchanges? A. Colorado Film