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)

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 #:
000188
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 21, 2023
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.

2G3S' Oka L. Bralet, Direct Examination. Q. Will you tell us the seating capacity of these theatres so far as you know them, at the time that you answer? A. So far as I know, yes, sir. The Alhambra has a seating capacity of about 760; the Hippodrome, about 550. The Crown, 320. The Heart Theatre, about 350. Q. Have these theatres been using the unlicensed service for some time? A. Yes, sir. Q. For how long a period, would you say? A. The Alhambra was completed on Decoration Day, and opened with unlicensed service. Decoration Day, 1913. Opened with the independent service, and have been using it ever since. The Hippodrome opened on Labor Day, 1913, and has been using independent service. Q. The Crown? A. The Crown Theatre has been using independent service with the exception of a short time, when they used licensed service. Q. Are they using unlicensed service now again? A. Using unlicensed service now, yes, sir. Q. And the Heart Theatre? A. Has been using both licensed and independent at different times. I neglected to also state the Empress Theatre, with a seating capacity of 370, using independent service. Q. How long has that been using independent service, if you know? A. Well, they have used both licensed and independent, but mostly independent. Probably for the last eighteen months, independent entirely. Q. Do you know how the theatres are divided in Toledo with respect to unlicensed and licensed service? A. I should say that about eigteen to twenty were using licensed service, and twenty-five to twenty-seven were using independent service. Q. Do you know how they are divided as to size, with reference to licensed and unlicensed service? A. About equal, I think. Q. Are some of the large theatres using unlicensed service? A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Braley, have you had any experience at any time in competition with a theatre which was owned either in whole or in part by the owner of a rental exchange? A. I have not ; no sir. Q. Are you interested in any theatre winch is using unlicensed service? A. Not at present; no, sir.