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 #:
000253
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.

Abraham Greenburg, Direct Examination. 2103 A. It was no good at all. I advertised pictures many times, and never got the reels. Q. Considering the character of the service and the requirements of the audiences at the present time, what do you say as to whether the prices of motion picture service have increased or diminished since 1907? A. Proportionately they have increased, that is, considering the better class of goods we get, and the way things are running. Q. What did you say? A. The better class of goods we are getting. The goods are much better today than they were five or six, or seven years ago. It costs more to produce them, and, of course, we have to pay for them. Q. How many exchanges are running in Camden at the present time? A. Xone in Camden. Q. How many exhibitors are there in Camden at the present? A. I think between twenty-four and twenty-seven in Camden. Q. How many of those houses are independent houses? A. That I do not know. Q. Do you know of several that are independent? A. Yes, sir; I know of some. Q. But you cannot give the exact number? A. No. Q. You have told us that you think the quality of the pictures has improved in the last few years? A. Yes, sir; I do. Q. You were in business in 1907? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the quality of the pictures satisfactory in 1907 to the exhibitor? A. During those days, yes; but we could not use the same stuff today. Q. What do you mean by that? A. I don't think it would be good enough. Q. Have you felt at any time, or did you feel at any time after the General Film Company went into business, that you were obliged or under any compulsion as an exhibitor to take service from the General Film Company? A. The only way I feared them was if I didn't pay my bills. Q. That was a fear, however, that you would have in connection with any exchange? A. Yes, sir; with anybody. In fact, it is no fear at all. It is a case of paying your bills and you get your goods. Q. Do you find that the producers o? licensed motion pictures are competing among themselves for the favor of the exhibitors? A. I should think so, yes.