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 00031 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 4
Leaf #:
00031
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.

James S. Blackton, Direct Examination. 1881 talk with other manufacturers in the East and see if a *> meeting could be brought about. Mr. Kleine offered to give us all a banquet at the Republican Club in New York if such a meeting could be pulled off, and meanwhile, Mr. Kleine made a personal visit to Orange to see Mr. Gilinore, Mr. White, and Mr. Edison, and subsequent to that — that was about a month after my talk in Chicago, he wrote to us inviting us to a dinner at the Republican Club. Mr. Grosvenor: Who wrote you? 2 The Witness: Mr. Kleine, stating that at that dinner all the then well-known manufacturers and importers of films would be present, and also representatives of the Edison Company. We attended the dinner, and I must say, to our surprise, Mr. Gilmore, who had always been very vindicative against all infringers, as he called us, was there, and he was very pleasant to us, and we discussed there the possibility of the men around that table becoming Edison licensees, and that was the beginning of the formation of the Patents Company. 3 By Mr. Kingsley: Q. Well, did you subsequently become an Edison licensee? A. We did. Q. At that time was George Kleine an Edison licensee, at the time the Vitagraph Company became a licensee of the Edison Company? A. Yes, he was a licensee before that time. He was the agent for the Edison films. Q. You say that George Kleine was an agent for the Edison film. Was he not also an agent for other films? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, after the Edison license agreement was prepared, did the Vitagraph Company become an Edison licensee? A. Yes, sir. Q. And do you recall whether George Kleine became an Edison licensee? A. Yes, sir, he did. Q. Now, are you preserving in your mind, Mr. Blackton, the distinction between an Edison licensee and a Patents Company licensee? A. Yes. Q. T may state for your information, that George Kleine