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 00042 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 #:
00042
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.

2492 Fred C. Aiken, Cross Examination. feet that the meeting called for January 11th at Buffalo was postponed to January 25th, 1908? A. I think that is correct. Q. I ask you to look at an article on the editorial page, being page 71, of the Moving Picture World, for February 1st, 1908, the article being entitled "The U. S. F. P. A." Volume 2, page 71. A. Yes, sir. Q. Does this article refresh your recollection so that you are able to testify that the meeting which had been postponed to January 25th, was further adjourned to February 8th, 9th and 10th/ 1908, at Buffalo? A. I think it was. Q. This article which you have just read, states: "The Executive Committee, sitting in Xew York, January 25th, passed on the by-laws suggested at Chicago, which will be adopted at Buffalo." Is that statement in accord with your recollection of the facts? A. I believe it is. Q. Was this meeting referred to there, to be held on February 8th, 9th and 10th, as a matter of fact held at Buffalo on the dates named, namely, February 8th, 9th and 10th? A. I cannot state definitely the exact dates we met at Buffalo. I know we met there. Q. You know that the meeting was adjourned from January 25th, don't you? A. Yes, it was adjourned. Q. I show you Volume 2 of the Moving Picture World, page 111, the issue of February 15th, 1908. Please read the article on that page, and see if it will refresh your recollection as to the exact date of that meeting? A. Well, it does not refresh my memory as to the exact date any more than it states the date there. I cannot recall positively the exact date. I know it was in February. Q. It was in the early part of February, wasn't it? A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was at Buffalo? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Grosvenor : I offer in evidence the two articles on page 111, the first being entitled, "The United Film Service Association and the Film Manufacturers,'' and the next, "The Platform of the Association," that article extending over on to page 112. And also the article immediately following, entitled, "The Position of the American Mutoscope & Biograph Company," this latter article being already in evidence, and num