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 #:
000196
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.

2046 Robert G. Peltier, Cross Examination. of the service? A. The only inducement that I have ever been offered, they once wanted me to come over to them, and I said, "I know you have a first-class service, but there is another man in my town — " Mr. Grosvenor : I object to this statement as hearsay, and as entirely irrelevant and immaterial, and not called for by the question addressed to the witness. Mr. Kingsley: He made the statement himself. It cannot be hearsay. Hy Mr. Kingsley : Q. You may answer? A. I told them that somebody was using their films in my town, and they said, "Well, we will take it away from him and give it to you," and I said, "I don't do business that way." Q. Do you select your own program, or permit the exchange to select it for you? A. Well, a little of each. Q. Do you frequently make requests of the exchange? A. Yes, sir. Q. For certain pictures? A. Yes, sir. Q. At certain times? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do they give them to you? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you find that they co-operate with you in endeavoring to furnish you the sort of program that you desire? A. Yes, sir, in every sense of the word. Cross examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Mr. Peltier, you say that for a considerable period you had no opposition in Mount Clemens, and that, therefore, you had no trouble from conflicting programs? A. I have had no opposition in the same line of service. I had opposition, though. Q. That is, before the General Film Company was organized there was not any trouble in conflicting programs? A. Yes, sir ; there was a little at that one time I told you of. Q. How long did that last? A. Not very long. Q. And excepting for that one instance, you had no trouble in Mount Clemens from conflicting programs, did you? A. No; there was nobody using the same service.