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 #:
000308
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
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.

2758 Floyd Brown, Direct Examination Q. In quoting a price for a program to an exhibitor, you make a sum for the whole program, do you not? A. Yes, sir. Q. Would it be feasible in making up this program, to distinguish between the different pictures as to the merit and desirability, and then fix different values upon each picture and carry out the resulting bookkeeping problem? Mr. Grosvenor: Objected to as leading in form. A. No, sir. By Mr. Kingslby: Q. Do you find it more feasible to furnish a program in the way that you are now furnishing it? A. Yes. Q. Do yon find that exhibitors prefer the pictures of one producer over the pictures of another producer even when they are of the same age? A. Yes, sir. Q. When you refer to the age of a motion picture, what do you mean? A. The number of days from the time when it is released. Q. By that do you mean the number of days that it has been on actual exhibition before various audiences or might have been on actual exhibition before various audiences? A. We mean the number of days from the time the manufacturer releases the picture to us. Q. In referring to the age of a motion picture, do you refer to the copy or the subject which has been on exhibition? A. I beg your pardon? Q. In referring to the age of a motion picture, do you refer to the copy, the particular copy, or to the subject which has been on exhibition? A. We refer to the copy — no, to the subject. Q. If a reel has not been in service at all though the subject has been released, does the value of the reel diminish as the reel's age increases? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Grosvenor: I object to that as leading in form, also move to strike out the answer. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. Did you ever have any experience with anything of that sort? A. Yes, sir.