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 #:
000194
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.

2644 Robert G. Peltier, Direct Examination. Q. How many motion picture theatres are there in Mount Clemens? A. Two in operation at present, and there is still another one there, but not operating now. Q. Do you use the licensed or unlicensed pictures? A. The licensed. Q. What is the name of your competitor, or what is the name of his theatre? A. The Lyceum. Q. What is the seating capacity of the Lyceum? A. About 240. Q. And that uses, I think you stated, the unlicensed service? A. Yes. Q. Mr. Peltier, have you always used the licensed service in the Bijou Theatre? A. Yes, sir. Q. From what rental exchange were you obtaining motion pictures in 1908 and 1909? A. The National Film Company, of Detroit. Q. Did you continue with the National Film Company until it sold its property to the General Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you since continued to take your service from the General Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Before the General Film Company began to do business in your field, did you find it possible to advertise a program in advance? A. I did not. Q. What was your experience at that time, with respect to keeping your program clear from your competitors? A. Well, there was comparatively no trouble, from the fact that I had no opposition, except for a short time I had a little opposition. Q. While you had this opposition, did you have any difficulty, then, in keeping your program clear? A. Very little. Q. From what source was this opposition house securing its service? A. For a while, from the Superior people of Toledo, and also the Vaudette Exchange, of Grand Rapids. Q. How long did that opposition continue? A. Oh, I should judge, a couple of months. Q. After the General Film Company began to serve you, did you find it possible to announce a program in advance, and to advertise it? A. A week, or two weeks, or three weeks, or four weeks, in advance. Q. And you could produce the program on the date designated in your advertisement? A. Yes, sir.