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 000609 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 #:
000609
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 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.

J. C. Graham, Direct Examination. 1227 Petitioner's Exhibit No. 228. 1 NIGHT LETTER THE WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY Sd— New York July 19 1910 Western Film Exchange Century Building, St. Louis, Mo. We have cancelled your license for using licensed film 2 in violation of terms of your license agreement with us. MOTION PICTURE PATENTS CO. 245 am 2 By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. This (Exhibit No. 228), is a night letter telegram, dated July 19th? A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was then received by you on the 20th? A. Yes, sir, the forenoon of the 20th. Q. Were you a stockholder in the Western Film Exchange? A. Yes. Q. Did any of the stockholders of the Western Film Exchange have any interest in the O. T. Crawford Film Exchange also located at St. Louis? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you interested in the O. T. Crawford Film Exchange? A. I was. Q. I show you a night letter telegram dated July 19th, 1910, addressed to the O. T. Crawford Film Exchange, and ask you whether that is the telegram of cancellation of the license of the O. T. Crawford Film Exchange received by that exchange on July 20th, 1910? A. Yes, this telegram was received practically identical with the other one, at the identical time. Q. Were you familiar with the business of the Crawford Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Had that company to the best of its ability lived up to the terms and conditions of the socalled exchange license agreement ?