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 00057 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 #:
00057
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. 1007 creased the producing force by engaging additional direc J tors, and engaging additional actors and actresses, constituting a stock company, each stock company being under the management of a director. In addition to the actors and actresses engaged in the stock company on weekly salaries, extra people were engaged to make a full cast for each production they were producing. In addition to the actors and actresses employed there were scenic artists, stage carpenters, property men and other assistants. During the different periods, as I have stated above, the increase in the number of actors has grown from one stock company of four or five, to eight stock companies employing approximately sixty actors and actresses, in addition to approximately twelve scenic artists, fifteen to twenty stage carpenters and about twelve property men. Q. In the year 1907, did you export any motion pictures? A. In 1907 we did not export any. Q. Do you at the present time? A. We do. We export our productions. Q. When did your exportation begin, what year? A. It began in 1909. Q. Can you state what percentage your export business g constitutes of your entire business? Mr. Grosvenor: I object to all this testimony as immaterial. The Witness : At the present time it constitutes approximately twenty-five to thirty per cent. By Mr. Caldwell : Q. You are familiar, are you not, Avith the requirement in the Edison license agreement as to the return of film? A. 4 I am. Q. Did you oppose that provision in the license agreement, or were you in favor of it? A. I was in favor of the return of film. Q. In January, 1908, when that agreement was made, you had been in the motion picture business for some seven or eight years? A. Yes. Q. And what were the reasons that influenced you to