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 000568 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 #:
000568
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.

1794 Jonas A. Koerpel, Direct Examination. existence of the General Film Company or the Motion Picture Patents Company we never had any program. In other words, we never knew what we were going to get. When an exhibitor got ready to open up a theatre he went to a film exchange, and the film exchange, the first question they would ask would be, "Well, how much money do you want to spend for films?" And he would say, "Well, I want to spend seventy or seventy-five dollars for service.' "Well, all right ; we will give you a very good service for that/' "Well, what do I get?" "Well, we can't tell offhand what you are going to get. We can't tell you, for these films are working all the time. We will give you a very good service." And they gave it to you, what you thought was a good service, but whether it was good or not you had no way of telling, because you never knew anything regarding the age of the film that you were getting, and you never knew what you were going to have the next day ; and it got so that in order to have a good show you simply had to go around to the back room where the man was who was called a "booker," and whoever paid him the most money, why, he got the best show. Q. In other words, you found it necessary to go to the rental exchange, and talk with the man who had charge of the films, or who was giving them out? A. You had to bribe them. Q. When was it that a definite program became possible? A. We never had any program until after there was a General Film Company, and that was shortly after the fire that occurred in the Vitagraph Company, in the Morton Building, in Nassau Street, and then we were informed that we would get our films at 19 East 21st Street. Q. You had been a customer, then, of the Vitagraph Company's branch in Nassau Street? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, after you went to the 21st Street office, did you find it possible then to have or get a program? A. We got programs very shortly afterwards. We were told what age reels we would have, and we were told what makes we would have on certain days. In other words, our shows were scheduled. We would get, for example, if we were to have a seven-day reel on Thursday, why. we would get the release of, say, the Vitagraph Company of one week before. Iu other words, we got Thursday's Vitagraph on Thursday, and if we had a ten-day reel on that program we would get Saturday's Vitagraph on the Saturday before that Thursday,