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 #:
000402
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.

2852 Otto P. Hall, Direct Examination. * Three or four of their subjects that consist of three or four reels each. Some of them are three, and some of them are four. Q. So they might take 12 to 15 reels of those? A. Yes, sir, I would say that would be three or four of the Warner features. Recross examination by Mr. Grosvenor : Q. And the same theatre takes 12 subjects of the licensed pictures? A. To the best of my judgment. 2 Q. Which also may be 15 to 20 reels? A. 1 don't think they take over two reels per day, and they run that in conjunction with the Warner features. Thereupon, OTTO P. HALL, the next witness produced by the defendants, of lawful age, being first duly sAvorn by the Examiner, deposed as follows : Direct examination by Mr. Kingsley: Q. Where do you live, Mr. Hall? A. Atlanta. (,>. How long have you lived in Atlanta? A. Since 1910. Q. Prior to that time where did you live? A. Cleveland, Ohio. Q. How long were you a resident of Cleveland? A. Four years. Q. In what business were you engaged while at Cleveland? A. The moving picture business. Q. In what branch of the moving picture business? A. From assistant manager to manager. Q. Of a motion picture theatre, or of an exchange? A Both. Q. Of what exchange were you assistant manager? A. I was never assistant manager of an exchange. Q. With what exchange were you connected? A. With the C. II. Peckham Exchange. Q. Were you the manager of that exchange? A. No, sir, I was in the machine department. Q. By that, do you mean the projecting machine department? A. Yes, sir.