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 #:
000205
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.

Lei/And B. Kent, Direct Examination. 2655 Q. And of the Comet? A. About three hundred and 1 fifty, I should judge. Q. What did you say the seating capacity of the Home Theatre was? A. Six hundred. Q. What is the name of your competitor who has the licensed service in your neighborhood? A. Carlyon. Q. What is his seating capacity? A. About four hundred and fifty. Q. Did you say you had never used the unlicensed service? A. No, sir. Q. Do you use any unlicensed film at all in your theatre now? A. Occasionally. Q. How long have you been doing that? A. Oh, for six months. Q. Are you solicited from time to time by the independent exchanges to change your service, and use the unlicensed service? A. Yes, sir. Q. And do they offer you inducements in way of prices and programs? A. Yes, sir, somewhat. Q. Are their prices cheaper or about the same? A. Well, one of them offers it a little cheaper, and the other one charges more. o Mr. Grosvexor : No cross examination. Thereupon, LELAND B. KENT, the next witness produced by the defendants, of lawful age, being first duly sworn by the Examiner, deposed: Direct examination by Mr. Kingsley: Where do you live, Mr. Kent? A. Toledo, Ohio. Q. How long have you lived in Toledo? A. Well, six or seven years. Q. Were you at one time in the motion picture business in Toledo? A. In the exhibiting? Q. Yes? A. No, sir. Q. Were you at one time the owner of an exchange in Toledo? A. Yes, sir. Q. When was it that you acquired an exchange in Toledo? A. Well, in about ±907. Q. Did you start this exchange yourself? A. Yes, sir.