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 00049 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 #:
00049
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.

Samuel Long, Direct Examination. 1899 Q. And what is your connection with that company? A. I am President of the company. Q. And have you been the President of the company ever since its organization? A. I was the first President. I was President from about 1907. Q. Well, it was organized in 1907, you say? A. I was Vice-President when it was organized. Q. And how soon after its organization did you become the President? A. In 1907. Q. You say it was organized in 1907? A. I mean, in 1908. Q. You became President, then, in 1908? A. Yes, sir. Q. And who was the first President? A. George Kleine. Q. Did you have any connection with the motion picture business prior to the time of the organization of the Kalem Company? A. I was with the American Mutoscope & Biograph Company. Q. Over what period? A. From the beginning of 1897 to near the end of 1906. Q. That is the same company that is known now under the name of the Biograph Company? A. It is the same company. Q. And what were your duties in connection with that company? A. I was in charge of the laboratory work in New York, and Hoboken, New Jersey. Q. Was there any other one connected with the Biograph Company who subsequently joined you in the organization of the Kalem Company? A. Mr. Frank Marion. Q. In what department of the business was Mr. Marion engaged? A. He was in charge of the scenarios and studio productions. Q. Do you know how long Mr. Marion was connected with the Biograph Company? A. During about the same period I was. He left the Biograph Company a few months after I severed my connection with it. Q. Then, during the time you were connected with the Biograph Company, you knew of the litigation that was pending between the Biograph Company and the Edison Company, did you? A. I knew of it, yes. Q. What connection have you with the General Film Company, if any? A. I am a Director of the General Film Company.