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 #:
000323
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.

Houston N. Morgan, Direct Examination. 2773 Q. I am speaking now of your experience as the manager of a licensed theatre in 1909 and 1910 prior to the — A. In 1909 and 1910, I was running, I myself was running a theatre running the unlicensed. Q. At that time you were running the unlicensed? A. Yes, sir; the unlicensed at the McKinley Theatre. Q. Yes. Now, going back prior to that period, were you managing a motion picture theatre which was using the licensed service prior to 1910? A. Yes. Running the licensed program? Yes, sir. I was running the Hamilton Theatre on Hamilton and Plymouth, Hamilton and Plymouth Place in St. Louis. Q. When you were running the Hamilton Theatre and using licensed service, from what exchange were you securing your service? A. Western. What was called the Western Film Exchange, owned by the Aitken Brothers. Harry Aitken and his brother. Q. Did you have any difficulty at that time in securing a program which you could announce in advance and advertise? A. None whatever. Q. Did you have at that time any experience of competition, or did any knowledge of competition in which other houses, motion picture houses were involved, come to your attention, where unfair advantage was taken of advertising of the programs in advance? A. Yes, I remember an incident where I was merely employed at the theatre. I was not financially interested in the theatre. I remember a very particular incident where I thought a great injustice was done to the exhibitor. The Favorite Theatre on Cherokee Street had advertised extensively and had made arrangements with the Western Film Exchange to produce on the release day, a picture gotten out by the Selig Polyscope Company called "Custer's Last Fight." They advertised it extensively in that neighborhood to be produced that night, that is, the evening of a certain day. I could not tell the exact day. I remember very well the gentleman I was working for, Mr. Weinburg, Fred Weinburg, when lie seen the advertising matter of his opposition theatre, he immediately got in communication with the Yale Film Exchange in Kansas City and got "Custer's Last Fight" and produced it in the afternoon before the other man could produce it that evening. I remember that very distinctly. Q. Where was the other house to get its picture from?