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 #:
000361
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.

JosErn M. CummingSj Direct Examination. 2811 Q. How many are you now serving from the Dallas office? A. In round numbers, 275. Q. Haye you since that time established another office, at Houston? A. I haye, sir. Q. Does the 275 exhibitors whom you testified you were serving, include those who are served from both offices? A. It does. Q. Have you made a canvass, or had a canvass made, of the State of Texas, to learn how many motion picture theatres there are in that State? A. Some two months ago I had one of my men make a careful study of how many theatres there were in the State as far as we could get at the data, and the figures reported to me were 503. Q. What kind of houses were these 503? A. They included merely the houses which were showing continuously either six days or seven days. In some parts of our State, they keep open on Sundays ; and in other parts, they do not. Q. This enumeration of 503 motion picture houses did not include any houses, so far as you know, and did not include, if your instructions were carried out, any houses which were only showing from time to time? A. As far as I know, they did not, sir. Q. How many reels of film were being taken by the General Film Company in Texas at the time you took possession of its property assets and business? A. Thirty-six weekly. The entire output at that time. Q. Have you increased the number of reels that you lease to exhibitors, since that time? A. We are buying 19 to-day, per week. Q. Did you find this necessary in order to serve the increased number of exhibitors whom you have taken on? A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you say that the fact that you had leased more reels had assisted you in providing suitable programs for the additional exhibitors whom you have taken on? A. Very materially. Without the additional output, we could not have taken on the houses at all. I might say that up to December 20th, we were buying 63 reels, which included the Exclusive Service. When that was discontinued, we had to discontinue them, of course. Q. Does the figures of 275 customers include any who are taking less than a complete week's service? A. Yes. I should say there are ten what we call special exchange li