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 #:
000579
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.

Jonas A. Koerpel, Direct Examination. 1805 Q. Would you say that you are showing as large a 1 percentage of foreign pictures now as formerly? A. Oh, no. Q. How much of a falling off has there been? A. Well, personally, I run three foreign educational, or travelogues, and industrials, every week, and I use one or two foreign dramas or comedies each week. Formerly we had as many as five or six a week on our program. Q. You say you have observed improvement in the quality of the pictures made by the licensed manufacturers? A. Yes, sir. o Q. Would you say that they had all improved equally, or in the same degree? A. Well, the independent manufacturers have improved wonderfully, also, but I think that they use the so-called licensed manufacturers as their standard to go by, it has egged them on. Formerly, independent producers were very shy on good photography, and good subjects, and good acting, but they are gradually taking over people who have been with the liceused companies, which makes their films more popular. Q. But I refer more especially to the licensed manufacturers. Do you find that some one licensed manufac ~ hirer has improved faster, or in greater degree than another? A. Sure. Q. Do you notice that some are competing more strenuously than the others? A. Some turn out better pictures than the others. Let us take the Melies films — why, they are absolutely worthless to the average exhibitor — the Vitagraph is good — but the Melies subjects are worthless to us, because their stories are no good, or the acting is no good, or else it is a one-reel travelogue, which does not go in the average motion picture business. Q. Now, suppose you do not want the Melies pictures, do 4 you have to take them? A. They never compelled me to take them. I would make a fair trade, I would give them a seven-day release for about a twenty-five day release sooner than take Melies. Q. You have spoken of the independent manufacturers. Do they solicit your business from time to time? A. Every day. Q. How do they do it? A. Their solicitors come around and discuss the films, and offer to put your service in for you. Of course, we get a large amount of advertising matter