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 #:
000520
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.

29GG Percival L. Waters, Direct Examination Q. Mr. Waters, will you tell us what was said on the occasion that Fox called upon you at your office, with reference to the possibility of his selling his plant? A. I don't know that Mr. Fox called at the office in reference to selling his plant. Q. I didn't mean that he called there to sell it, but I mean to ask you what he said with reference to selling it? A. The conversation opened about the money I had telephoned about, and he afterwards looked the offices over and remarked about them and wanted to know how the thing was getting along, and I told him pretty well, and he wanted to know if it was not possible for some working arrangement to be made between the General Film Company and the Greater New York Film Rental Company, and I asked him what he meant by "working arrangement," and he said he meant for the Greater New York Film Rental Company to keep away from our customers and that we were to keep away from the Greater New York Film Rental Company's, and I told him such an arrangement was not possible as far as I was concerned. Then he asked me if I knew why it was that the General Film Company had never approached him on the subject of purchasing his exchange, and I told him that that was something that I didn't have anything to do with, and knew nothing about it, and he said that he thought that he had figured the matter out. I asked him how he had figured it, and he said that he thought the General Film Company wanted at least one exchange to remain intact so that it would not have the appearance of being a trust, and thought that it would work out for the Government's benefit, and I told him I knew nothing about that, and he said, "Do you suppose they will ultimately make me an offer?" And I said, "I can only say what I said before — I know nothing about those things. I am the General Manager of the Company, and my duties only bogin after the exchanges are acquired." And he went on to ask if I thought they would make him an offer, and I told him I saw no reason why they should not, and I asked him if he wanted to figure on the sale of his exchange, and he said, "Yes," that he would like to take the matter up; and I told him if lie was serious I would see if 1 could locate Mr. Kennedy, as he was the man who handled the matter, and he said he was serious, and I said: