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 00053 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 #:
00053
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 Lung, Direct Examination. VM> Q. With whom were your negotiations conducted, that is, with what representative of the Edison Company? A. With Mr. Moore, and afterwards with Mr. Dyer. Q. And what was the result of those negotiations? A. The final result was the granting of a license to us. Q. I show you Petitioner's Exhibit Xo. 92, attached to the answer of the defendant Thomas A. Edison Company in this case, being license agreement dated January 31st, 1908, between the Edison Manufacturing Company, and the Kalem Company, and ask you if that is the license agreement which you executed with the Edison Manufacturing Company? A. I believe it is. Q. During the Fall of 1907 did you know that litigation was pending between the Edison Company and the Biograph Company? Mr. Grosvenor: I object to that as leading, and, also, a statement of something that isn't yet proven. The Witness : Yes, there was. By Mr. Caldwell: Q. Did you know whether or not litigation was pending between the Edison Manufacturing Company, and any other producers of motion pictures at that time? A. I don't remember. Q. You do not remember the names of the defendants, you mean? Mr. (iROsvenor: I object to that as palpably leading. The Witness: Will you read the last two or three questions and answers. The questions and answers were read as follows: "Q. During the Fall of 1907 did you know that litigation was pending between the Edison Company and the Biograph Company? A. Yes, there was. "Q. Did you know whether or not litigation was pending between the Edison Manufacturing Company