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 000430 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 3
Leaf #:
000430
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:
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.

1656 John Hardin, Direct Examination. Q. What did you say the date of that catalogue is? A. This is February 15th, 1908. Q. And what was the price of the Universal Model, February 15th, 1908? A. Seventy-five dollars. Q. Is that the same price at which it had been sold during preceding years? A. Yes, sir. Q. I show you a catalogue entitled "Edison Kinetoscopes'' and endorsed "Form 410, December 1st, 1908." Do you recognize it? Mr. Grosvenor: I want these books marked for identification, please, and kept by the Examiner, so that I can use them in the examination of other witnesses. A. Yes, I recognize it. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. What types of projecting machines are set out in that catalogue? A. On pages 8 and 9, the Underwriters' Model, Type B. Q. How does that differ from the Underwriters' Model that was described in the catalogue of February 15th, 1908? A. This is all metal mechanism, whereas the other was a wood cabinet; it has a lower magazine and take-up underneath the stand, whereas the other one had it in front of the stand. It has a different lamp house, heavier constructed, heavier material, and heavier and different arc lamp, and a different rheostat. Also has five adjustable legs, where the other had four, and is a different machine altogether. Has a different type of fire shutter. This fire shutter acts with a centrifugal movement, where the other was a friction. It is a different type altogether. Q. What was the price of the machine you have just described? A. Two hundred twenty-five dollars. Q. What other projecting machine is advertised in the catalogue I have just shown you? A. There is the Exhibition Model, one-pin movement, $155. That is the same machine as was advertised in the previous catalogue. Q. This is the same machine that was advertised in the catalogue of February 15th, 190S? A. At $155, yes.