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 #:
000508
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.

2954 Theodore W. Williams, Cross Examination. 1 Mr. Grosvenor: I also move to strike out the answer as not responsive to the question. By Mr. Caldwell : Q. Do you remember when Meyer & Singer left the General Film Company, discontinued their service, following that? A. No, I do not. Q. Did you tell them that they would not fare well if they took service from the Greater New York Film Rental Company? A. No, sir. Q. At this time had you been informed by the Patents Company or anyone connected with the Patents Company that the license of the Greater New York Film Rental Company was going to be cancelled? A. No, sir. Q. Had any official of the Patents Company, or anyone else, informed you that the supply of the Greater New York Film Rental Company would be cut off after two weeks? A. No, sir. Q. Did you know anything about it? A. No. 3 Cross examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Mr. Williams, in answer to that last question, "Did you know anything about it," and you answered, "No, sir," what Avere you referring to? A. I thought he asked me if I had received any notification from any of the officials of the company or from the Motion Picture Patents Company, that they were going to discontinue giving them film. Is that your quest ion? Mr. Caldwell : That is right. The Witness: We never got any notification to that effect. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. What were your duties as solicitor? A. Go out and procure new business. Q. And new business was to be procured from those who were not already your customers? A. It might be an in