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 #:
000517
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.

Percival L. Waters, Direct Examination. 2(J(>3 Q. If at any time a customer of the Greater New York Film Rental Company came to you for service was there any discrimination against him because of the fact that he had been served by the Greater New York Film Rental Company? A. No. Q. Or for any other reason? A. No. Q. Did you from time to time have customers leave you and go to the Greater New York Film Rental Company who subsequently came back to the General Film Company for service? A. Yes. Q. Was any discrimination shown against those customers who had left you and gone to the Greater New York Film Rental Company, and then came back to the General Film Company? A. No. Q. Do you know of any instance where the Motion Picture Patents Company discriminated in regard to customers in favor of the General Film Company? A. No. Q. If at any time a customer of the General Film Company wished to go to the Greater New York Film Rental Company, was anything done to prevent his going? A. No. Q. Did the General Film Company ever refuse to serve customers of the Greater New York Film Rental Company who came to it for service? A. No. Q. In dealing with the Greater New Y^ork Film Rental Company, and in carrying on the competition then existing in the New York field, did you do anything, or assist any one in any way to prepare or draft plans to drive the Greater New Y^ork Film Rental Company out of business? A. No. Q. Did you, in the early part of September, 1911, call up William Fox, the President of the Greater New York Film Rental Company, and ask him to call upon you at your place of business? A. Yes. Q. Will you tell us the circumstances of that conversation, how it began, and how it was that Mr. Fox finally called upon you at your place of business? A. I telephoned Mr. Fox relative to a certain amount of money that I considered I owed the Greater New York Film Rental Company, and told him that I had taken the matter up with Mr. Rosenbluh, and after I asked him if he knew of the circumstances and conditions, I asked him if the check should be made to him or to the Greater New York Film Rental Company; and he remarked about not having heard