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 #:
000399
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:
July 25, 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.

Ike Van Ronkel, Cross Examination. 2249 did not keep track of when they did reach that quality. I had all I could do to run that office. Q. As a matter of fact, you did not think that they had reached a high enough state of perfection until the Patents Company was formed? A. I heard some independent people say that the "Greaser's Gauntlet" was very fine, only very sensational. Q. Then, the reason you did not show7 the Biograph pictures in the latter part of 1908, or before the Patents Company was formed, was not that you had signed this Edison license, wrhich prevented you from showing either the Biograph or Kleine productions? A. I w^ould not say that. This is a free country. I could buy whatever I felt like. Q. But you did not? A. I bought all I could afford to buy. Q. But you simply did not feel like showing any of the pictures of the Biograph and Kleine make? A. I stated to you that the Biograph was so rotten, and that the Kleine films — we had enough foreign films made by Pathe. I do not see how you could interpret it any other way. Q. But you said the Biograph Company became good before the Patents Company was formed. A. I heard they made the "Greaser's Gauntlet,'1 which they said was very fine, but it was very, very sensational, and as I Avas supplying some very high-class trade, they did not care very much for it. We were then on an uplift movement, trying to get better. When we first started, they started to make the "Great Train Robbery,'1 the "Escape from Sing Sing,1' and things like that. The antagonism from the preachers and the public press was terrible, which you can see by reading back, and I did not care to go into that sensational film. I will even say that the Biograph Company makes some very sensational pictures to-day, and the City of Chicago kills a lot of the things they make. They are very fine photographically, though, in their quality. Q. They run more to the dime novel kind of story? A. Not exactly, but the producer has a brain that runs in that channel, probably, and that is the reason he produces that kind of pictures. I never asked him. Q. The General Film Company had a branch in Chicago before you sold out to the General Film Company? A. It did, sir.