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 (1914)

Page scan 00041 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:
1914
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 5
Leaf #:
00041
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.

Fred C. Aiken, Cross Examination. 2491 Do you recall his presence? A. Yes, sir; he was there representing the Kleine Optical Company, a rental exchange. Q. And Mr. Selig is reported to have been present. Do you recall his presence there? A. I do not, no, sir. Q. The article in the Show World which I have shown you states that on the night of the 14th, there was a banquet at which "in addition to the members of the Association, the following film manufacturers were represented : Edison Manufacturing Company, by Alex T. Moore and John Hardin, of Chicago; Essanay Film Manufacturing Company, George K. Spoor and G. M. Anderson ; Kalem Company, Mr. Marvin; Vitagraph Company of America, William T. Rock, J. Stuart Blackton and Mr. Smith, of New York, and John Rock, of Chicago; Pathe Freres, J. A. Berst, or New YTork, and E. H. Montagu, of Chicago; G. Melies, George Melies, of New York ; Gaumont and Urban-Eclipse Company, George Kleine and Edward Davis, of the Kleine Optical Company, Chicago, and H. Blache, personal representative of Mr. Gaumont. " Do you recall the presence of those individuals that evening? Mr. Kingsley: Objected to, as incompetent, immaterial and irrelevant, not binding upon the defondants, and whether it is true or false, not tending in any way to impeach the testimony of this witness. The Witness : I believe they were there that evening. By Mr. Grosvenor : Q. The by-laws had not yet been adopted, had they? A. I could not state definitely as to that, whether they were adopted as a whole by that evening, or whether they were completed and adopted at Buffalo. I am not sure. Q. Showing you again the account in the Moving Picture World of the meeting of December 14th, does that refresh your recollection that the meeting on that day was adjourned to January 11th, to meet at Buffalo? A. Yes, sir. Q. I show you an advertisement in the Moving Picture World, on the front cover, of January 4th, 1908, and ask you if that refreshes your recollection to the ef