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 #:
000512
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.

2958 Charles L. Wortiiingtox, Cross Examination. * Greater New York Film Rental Company customers? A. Yes, sir, they did. (>. Did you at any time, directly or indirectly, convey to any customers whose business you solicited, that the Greater New York Film Rental Company might lose its license? A. No, sir. Q. At that time did you know what an exchange license was? A. I did not. Q. Had you ever been in the film rental business before that time? A. Not before February 10th, no, sir. ^ Cross examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. I low did you know who the customers of the Greater New York Film Rental Company were? A. You could not see until you got inside, and they told you that. There was no way to tell whether they were using the General Film stuff or whether they were getting their service from the Greater New Yrork. Q. Then you may have at least approached the theatres or owners of the theatres — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who were customers of the Greater New York Film 3 Rental Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you may have left a card with such customers? A. After the 13th or 14th. Not previous to that. Q. Your business was to become acquainted with the theatre owners and establish friendly relations with all of them in your territory? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was it that told you not to go near the customers of the Greater New York Film Rental Company? A. Mr. Willis was one, Mr. Etris was another, and Mr. Kane. Q. Who is Mr. Willis? A. Mr. Willis was at that time General Representative of the General Film Company. 4 Q. Located where? A. Well, he was in New York at that time. His headquarters were in Cleveland. Mr. Etris was one of the Managers of the 23rd Street branch, and Mr. Kane was the other Manager. Q. What did they tell you to do? A. They said to keep away from them, as soon as we got in and found they were getting service from the Greater New York Film Rental Company, not to solicit their business. Q. Just to get out? A. Get out. Q. And leave your card? A. Did not say anything about