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 000136 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 #:
000136
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.

1986 James S. Blacktox, Direct Examination. stantial and material parts thereof and which are an infringement upon said Letters Patent No. 589,1G8, and that your actings and doings are contrary to equity and good conscience ; WE, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the same appearing to us to be true, do strictly and fully command and enjoin you, the said AMERICAN VITAGRAPH COMPANY and WALTER ARTHUR, individually and as General Manager as aforesaid, and your servants, agents, attorneys, employees, workmen and confederates, and each and every of you, under the penalties that may fall thereon, that you do henceforth altogether, absolutely and entirely desist and refrain from directly or indirectly making, constructing, using, vending, delivering, working, or putting into operation or use, or in anywise counterfeiting or imitating the said invention, or any kinetographic cameras or apparatus for making photographs of moving objects or supplies therefor, or photographic films made or operated in accordance therewith or like or similar to those which you, said defendants, have heretofore made, sold, constructed, operated or used in infringement of said Letters Patent No. 589,168, and from in any way further infringing said Letters Patent or the rights of the complainant under the same. WITNESS the Honorable MELVILLE W. FULLER, Chief Justice of the United States, at the City of New York, in said District, this 18th day of September, one thousand nine hundred. JOHN A. SHIELDS, Clerk of the IT. S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of New Y^ork. Dyer, Edmonds & Dyer, Solicitors for Complainant. S. O. Edmonds, Of Counsel for Complainant. By Mr. Kingsley : Q. Mr. Blackton, after the injunction of September 18th, 1900, which is in evidence marked as "Defendants' Exhibit No. 114," what arrangement did you make with the Edison Manufacturing Company with respect to producing motion pictures? A. We arranged with the PMison Manufacturing