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 000359 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 #:
000359
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.

Albert J. Gilljgham, Direct Examination. 2209 out by the so-called independents sufficient in quality and quantity to enable you to conduct an exchange business in your territory? A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you been so advised? A. Yes, sir. There were other exchanges that were being conducted in our territory that were using the independent program. Q. What other exchanges were there in your territory, independent exchanges, at the time you sold to the General Film Company? A. There was the Michigan Film Company, located in the Union Trust Building, Detroit; there was the Toledo Film Company, located in Toledo, Ohio, and there was also the Superior Film Company, located in Toledo, Ohio, handling the independent program. Q. Do you know whether Mr. Mandelbaum entered upon negotiations for the sale of the Lake Shore Film & Supply Company at the same time when he made this visit to Mr. Kennedy with you in connection with the National Vaudette Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Mandelbaum about that time? Mr. Grosvenor: What time was this? The Witness : This was in August, 1910, at the time the National Vaudette Film Company was sold to the General Film Company. After Mr. Kennedy had made the offer, and it had been accepted for the National Vaudette Company, Mr. Gleichman and myself went down stairs at No. 10 Fifth Avenue, and Mr. Mandelbaum came down and told us what he had been offered for his exchange. By Mr. Caldwell: Q. Did he tell you whether or not it was satisfactory to him, or that he was going to sell? A. He said he was going to sell. He didn't consider the price to be as good as he expected, owing to the fact that we had received a larger price for the National Vaudette Film Company than what had been offered for the Lake Shore Company. Q. What price did you get for the National Vaudette Company? A. Sixty thousand dollars. Q. Did you consider that exchange as valuable as his, or more so? A. We had two exchanges that had been