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 #:
000528
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.

4 2974 Walter W. R. Greene, Direct Examination. A. The Universal, and the Mutual, and quite a number of feature concerns, hut complete programs, I think, the Universal, and Mutual, and Greater New York Film Rental Company. Q. Does the Universal supply a complete program to exhibitors? A. Yes. Q. Of how many releases per week? A. I think — I am not sure whether it is twenty-eight or thirty-six. Q. And does the Mutual supply a complete program to exhibitors in New York? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of how many releases? A. Not absolutely; I know it is something like thirty-eight or forty. Q. Have you recently had a computation made of the number of exhibitors doing business in Greater New York? A. No. (2. Are you now the General Manager of the General Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. How long since you have been the General Manager? A. The 2Gth of January of this year. Q. Prior to that time you were out of the business, were you not? A. A year and a half. Q. At the present time is the General Film Company competing with the Greater New York Film Rental Company for business? A. Yes. Q. What are your instructions to your outside men with respect to their course of dealing with exhibitors who are now taking service from the Greater New York Film Rental Company? A. To keep away from them. Q. In what field do you seek to get new customers? A. New theatres and the unlicensed houses. Thereupon, WALTER W. R. GREENE, the next witness produced by the defendants, of lawful age, being first duly sworn by the Examiner, deposed as follows: Direct examination by Mr. Kingsley : Q. Where do you live? A. Newark, New Jersey. Q. Have you been enrployed from time to time by the Motion Picture Patents Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. What work have you done at various times for the