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 000446 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 #:
000446
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:
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.

229G Chester W. Sawin, Direct Examination. Q. How many are served by the Universal? A. .Fiftytwo. Q. And how many by the Mutual? A. Fifty-three. Q. And by the special feature companies? A. Twentytwo. Q. Do any of the special feature concerns serve a complete program? A. No, sir. Q. In mentioning the twenty-two served by the special features, what did you mean by that? A. I mean the main part of their program is made up of features, but they use independent in connection with it, used as fill-ins. I did not mean those independent films that I stated in the number of theatres supplied by other independent exchanges. Q. You included them in the number you gave, as you did your own? A. No, sir; I don't think we have a single theatre that is using a feature with ours. Q. What per cent, of business in value in that territory is done by the special feature companies, if you know? A. I don't know the rates charged, outside of Washington and Baltimore. Q. What rates do they charge there? A. They charge from twenty-five to fifty dollars per day, according to the class of the feature; that is, the Famous Players, and the Warner Features charge from ten to twenty-five dollars. Q. Take Washington; in how many theatres, or how many theatres buy that special feature service? A. Not any one. exclusively. Q. Who has put them in? A. The Garden Theatre, on Ninth Street. They use Warners and the Famous Players, together with independent one-reel subjects each day, but they don't change their pictures daily. By Mr. Caldwell: Q. Just how active is that competition between the General Film Company and these other companies yon have named? A. Each of the film companies have their solicitors on the road at all times, yes, sir. Q. You have one or more? A. One, yes. Q. Are you losing customers to one or the other of your competitors? A. T suppose there are on an average of two or three changes a week in our customers.