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 #:
000527
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. Wateks, ■ Direct Examination. 2973 Q. Was it a matter that came within the scope of your authority as General Manager of the General Film Company? A. No. Q. At the time of the second interview with Rosenbluh, did you tell Kosenbluh that an independent exchange which was doing business in the West at the time you had a conversation with him in the preceding September, had since been absorbed? A. No. Q. In the course of the testimony given by Louis Rosenbluh in this action, at page 376, he was asked the questions and gave the answers which I shall read to you : "Q. After the formation of the General Film Company, and after it acquired these licensed exchanges in the City of New York, speaking from your observation of the business and the course of the prices, state whether or not there was any change in prices from the rental exchanges to the exhibitors? A. There was a gradual increase in prices. Q. After the formation of the General Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. About what did that aggregate? A. I should imagine, about forty per cent, increase." Were you familiar with the prices charged by rental exchanges to exhibitors both before and after the formation of the General Film Company? A. To a certain extent. Q. And was there a gradual increase of prices to the exhibitors, after the General Film Company had acquired a number of exchanges in the City of New York? A. No. Q. Was there an increase of prices aggregating forty per cent, after the General Film Company had acquired the various exchanges in the City of New York? A. No. Q. Has there been any increase of prices aggregating forty per cent, at any time within the past five years? A. No. Q. Have the prices of motion picture service to licensed exhibitors increased to any appreciable extent in the City of New York in the past five years? A. No. Q. How many releases are the licensed manufacturers producing per week at the present time? A. Fifty some odd. They vary from day to day. Q. What competition does the General Film Company have in this field at the present time? A. And by that what do you mean? Q. By that I mean, what companies are supplying complete service to exhibitors in New York at the present time?