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 #:
000445
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.

John Collier, Direct Examination. 2895 cause of the bad films being shown, and the exhibitors became frightened and were being pursued, and we were in touch with the moving picture men because we had been investigating them. They came to the People's Institute and asked me what to do, and we advised them to form a local voluntary censorship to improve the quality of the films. We agreed to organize the Board, and w^e called together eleven civic bodies, including the Public Education Association, the Charity Organization Society, the Children's Aid Society, the Ethical Social League, and similar disinterested bodies. We then approached the manufacturers and asked them to submit their films to us before they were made public. We went to the Motion Picture Patents Company, which had just been organized, and to the independent groups, and both groups agreed to submit their films. At this time the Board was simply the agent of the moving picture exhibitors and the New York public. In June, 1909, the representatives of the Motion Picture Patents Company approached the Board of Censorship, which was then not called the "National Board," and asked that an effort be made to extend the inspection of films to all films shown in the United States. The Board stated that it was willing to do this if the trade interests wrould meet all or a part of the expenses entailed. The National wTork was begun in June, 1909, with the inspection of all of the film output of the Motion Picture Patents Company and about one-third of the film output of the independent producers, and the work was continued to date. During this time we have continuously censored the film output of the Motion Picture Patents Company except for about three weeks in the Pali of 1909, and we have gradually extended our control until it includes all the regular independent producers and nearly all of the feature films and State Bights producers. We are not, however, censoring for the Kinemacolor films. Mr. Grosvenor: Thev do not need censoring? The Witness : That is what they say, and that is correct. By Mr. Kingsley : Q. Have you in mind the character of criticisms that were