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 000527 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 #:
000527
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.

Calvin S. Edwards, Cross Examination. 2377 Q. If it is about the same, you try and get the busi * ness? A. If it is about the same, yes, sir. Q. Now, can't you mark or indicate on this map the territory which is part of your general agency, which can be reached just as easily, or about as easily from the neighboring general agencies? Mr. Caldwell: That question is objected to on the ground that the witness has stated that it is a question of express charges, and in no possible way could he determine from an inspection of that 9 map alone what the express charges would be. Mr. Grosvenor : Read the question. The Examiner repeats the question as follows: "Q. Now, can't you mark or indicate on this map the territory which is part of your general agency, which can be reached just as easily, or about as easily from the neighboring general agencies?" The Witness: No, I would not be able to mark on the map just what they are, without having the express 3 charges here, ami know what they are. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. I am not asking you anything about express charges, Mr. Witness. I am asking you to mark out this part of your district; that is, the outlying parts of your district which are readied just as easily from another agency as from your own. Do you understand the question? A. Yes, certainly. 4 Mr. Caldwell: And I object to the question, on the ground already stated. The witness has said that it is a question of express rates, and facility of railroad transportation, matters which are not shown or disclosed by that map. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Witness, what are the general agencies which surround your agency; that is, Kansas City? Name the gen