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 000453 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 #:
000453
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.

William P. IIerbst, Direct Examination. 2303 Q. They are always calling your attention to what they are doing? A. Yes, sir. Q. And asking you to demand of your exchange the particular pictures to which they refer? A. Yes, sir. Q. What service were you giving your audiences four years ago? A. Four years ago, I guess, or I think, the youngest picture was in about ten days, and the others were commercial stuff. I think we run two reels a day at that time. Q. And now you are running four reels a day? A. Yes, sir, and six reels on Sunday. Q. Having in mind the difference in the quality of the service that you were giving your audiences four years ago, and that which you are giving them now, and also having in mind the increased number of reels in the service, what do you say as to whether the prices have increased, remained stationary, or fallen off? A. Well, for the value we receive, I should say that the price was less. Q. Do you receive advertising matter from the unlicensed exchanges? A. Yes; from time to time. Q. And do their solicitors call upon you from time to time, seeking to induce you to change the licensed service for the unlicensed service? A. Yes, sir, particularly the features. Q. And do they offer you any inducements in the way of price? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do they offer to furnish you with a complete program if you will substitute the unlicensed service for the licensed service? A. Well, they know that I am a staunch supporter of the licensed service, and they doirt worry me very much about changing the service. Q. What projecting machine do you use in your house? A. A Motiograph machine. Q. Where is that made, or by whom? A. It is made in Chicago. Q. You do not know the name of the manufacturer? A. The Enterprise Manufacturing Company. Q. Did you ever feel, Mr. IIerbst, when the General Film Company wras started, that you were obliged to take your service from the General Film Company? Mr. Grosvenor: Objected to, on the ground that