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 #:
000495
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
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.

Warren R. Palmer, Direct Examination. 2941 By Mr. KlNGSLBY: Q. In 1909, at the time of the establishment of the National Board of Censors, 3011 were passing upon both licensed and unlicensed pictures, were you not? A. In 1909, we were passing on all licensed, and approximately three-quarters of the unlicensed. From 70 to 80 per cent, of the unlicensed film. Q. Can you tell us in what proportions these films were submitted to you in 1909? A. Of the films that we censored, I would state to my best knowledge, but it is not based on the record — not based on our office records — that about 35 per cent, of the films were unlicensed, and the rest were licensed, but we were not at that time passing on all unlicensed films. Our records are not sufficiently clear to base more than an estimate on them for the year 1909. Q. Is that your best recollection and best judgment? A. My best recollection and judgment is, that of the films we censored, between 35 and 40 per cent, were unlicensed. Mr. Grosvenok : No cross examination. WARREN R. PALMER, a witness produced on behalf of the defendants, of lawful age, being first duly sworn by the Examiner, deposed: Direct examination by Mr. Caldwell: . Q. Where do you live, Mr. Palmer? A. Lester Manor, Virginia. Q. In the year 1909, in what business were you engaged? A. In the motion picture business. Q. And in what phase of the motion picture business? A. Film rental business. Q. What was the name under which you conducted business at that time? A. Motion Picture Supply Company. Q. And can you state about what time in the year 1909 you commenced business under that name? A. I believe it was in November. Q. Was that a corporation at that time? A. It was, under the laws of New York.