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 000295 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 #:
000295
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 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.

Harry Schwal.be, Direct Examination. 2145 your competitors compare with the theatres served by the General Film Company? A. I do not just see what you mean by the character. Do you mean the way the theatres are conducted? Q. No. I mean in point of size. I will put the question in a little different form. About how many theatres are there in Philadelphia that would seat 500 to 1,500? A. I should judge, about twelve. Q. Of that number, how many theatres of that size are served by the General Film Company? A. About four or five. Four, anyway. Q. That would leave from six to eight of the large theatres in Philadelphia that are served by your competitors, is that right? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, what is the situation as to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, another large city in your territory? A. Well, there are six theatres there on the principal street. Two of them are supplied by the General Film Company exclusively. They use nothing but General Film service. A third theatre, that uses a General Film and unlicensed service mixed, and three theatres that use entirely unlicensed service. Q. Then, of the six theatres in Harrisburg, on the principal street — and what street is that, by the way? A. Market Street. Q. The General Film Company is getting about two and a half theatres out of six? A. Yes, sir. Q. What is the situation in Camden, New Jersey? A. Well, we supply very few in Camden. Q. How many theatres do you know of there being in Camden? Motion picture theatres? A. Twenty-three or twenty-four, I guess. Q. And of that number, how many are served by the General Film Company? A. Only about four. Mr. Grosvenor: When you say, "Served by the General Film Company," do you mean, served by your branch of the General Film Company? The Witness: There are no theatres served in Camden, except by the General Film Company of Philadelphia, but they may be served by the Greater New York Film Rental