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 #:
000329
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.

Jacob Warner, Direct Examination. 2779 Q. Was the Delmar Theatre in existence when the Washington Theatre began to operate? A. No, sir. Q. When did the Delmar Theatre come into existence? A. Within possibly six months or seven months, something like that. Q. And by that do yon mean within six or seven months after you started the Washington Theatre? A. Yes, sir. Q. What position did the Delmar Theatre occupy with reference to the Washington Theatre? A. The locality, you mean? Q. Yes? A. Nearly opposite. Q. On the same street? A. Yes, sir. Q. What kind of motion picture program did the Delmar Theatre use, licensed or unlicensed? A. The licensed. Q. From what source did the Delmar Theatre obtain its motion picture programs? A. It was called the Western Exchange. Q. Where was the Western Exchange located? A. In the City of St. Louis. Q. Was the Western Exchange a competitor of the O. T. Crawford exchange? A. Yes, sir. Q. After the Delmar Theatre was started and after it began actively to compete with the Washington Theatre, what experience did you have with reference to conflicting programs of licensed motion pictures? A. We found that we had to repeat very often, and if we did pick a program the chances were that he probably would get the program there before we did, and sometimes, of course, it was the other way. Q. Did you find that this had any effect upon your business? A. It did. Q. What effect did it have? A. It had a tendency to decrease the patronage. Q. Did the patronage in fact fall off? A. Yes, sir. Q. And while it was falling off was this condition of duplication of programs going on? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you do, if anything, Mr. Warner, to cure this condition and to prevent this duplication of programs? A. We finally changed our service and received it from Kansas City, from the Yale -Film Company. Q. And was it the licensed service that you received from Kansas City from the Yale Film Exchange? A. Yes, sir.