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 3
Leaf #:
000469
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:
July 11, 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.

Albert E. Smith, Direct Examination. 1695 November, 1911, did you say to him in terms or in substance: "I thought I would want to leave you for the alibi, and I have been able to do that for quite a while, but I cannot do that any more. They simply made up their minds they were going to get you out of the way, and I suppose they will do it?" A. I made no such statement. Q. When Mr. Fox called upon you in November, 1911, did you say to him either in terms or in substance : "I was the most dumfounded man in the world when I found that Berst had sat down. You know that our organization is the same as any other. It is generally led by one or two men who are in power. Between what Mr. Kennedy says and one or two others, the rest of them are like a lot of sheep, and a lot of lambs, and they all follow suit, and I suppose they brought pressure to bear on Mr. Berst, or he would not have voted against you?'' A. I have no recollection of any such conversation. Q. Did you make any such statement to him, as a matter of fact? A. No, I could not have made it. Q. On the occasion when he called on you in November, 1911, did you say to him either in terms or in substance: "Now, that is all done. I cannot get it reopened. If I could get it beaten on the floor before the letter was written to you, I am sure I cannot do it now. The best I can do is to try to get you a settlement and to try to get you some money?" A. I did not. Q. Did you say to Mr. Fox when he called upon you in November of 1911, either in terms or in substance: aFox, I know in my heart, and I know just as well as you do, that they have got no reason to cancel your license under the license agreement that they have given you?" A. I made no such statement. Q. Did you say to Mr. Fox on the occasion when he called upon you in November, 1911: "I know, as you do, that you have got your concern to live up to it religiously and carefully. They have tried every which way to find fault with you, and could not do it. I know in my heart and soul that they jobbed you." Did you make this statement to him, either in terms or in substance? A. I did not. Q. Did you say to him : "I know in my heart and soul that they jobbed you?" A. Positively not.