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)

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 #:
000225
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
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 21, 2023
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.

Thomas W. Stephens, Direct Examination. 2075 Mr. Caldwell: Objected to as entirely irrelevant, and incompetent, calling upon the witness to guess at the mental state or operations of a third person. The Witness : I had nothing to do with the negotiations. I don't know when they were started, or anything about them. By Mr. Grosvenor : Q. Your company was primarily in the photograph business, was it not, and by that I mean the making of photographic supplies? A. Yes. Q. Did you ever make a study of the motion picture camera, or the projecting machine? A. Well, I domt know that you would call it a study, exactly. I was familiar with the machine we made at that time. Q. What was the name of that machine that you sold? A. We called it a Biopticon. Q. And did you use in that machine the same type of film that is used in other projecting machines? A. It was wider, as I remember, at that time than that which is used today. Q. But it was a translucent transparent strip? A. The same kind. Thereupon, THOMAS W. STEPHENS, the next witness produced by the defendants, of lawful age, being first duly sworn by the Examiner, deposed as follows : Direct examination by Mr. Caldwell: Q. What business are you engaged in, Mr. Stephens? A. Well, I don't know just how to answer that. I am in a number of businesses. I am a banker, primarily, and I am President of the Ansco Company. Q. And banking, is it your principal business? A. Yes, sir; it has been in my career. Q. What is the name of your house? A. T. W. Stephens Company. Q. And where are their offices? A. No. 2 Wall Street, Xew York. Q. And how long have you been in that business? A. That firm has been in existence since 1902, May 1st.