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 #:
000548
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.

201)0 George K. Spook, Direct Examination. 1 Mr. Grosvenor: Objected to, as leading. By Mr. Caldwell : Q. Did the pendency of that litigation influence yon in any way as to making further investments in the business? Mr. Gkosvenor: Objected to also, as leading. The Witness: Yes, sir. 2 By Mr. Caldwell : Q. Did you receive any inquiries from any of your customers as to this litigation and what effect it might have upon them or their business? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were those inquiries few or numerous? A. Numerous. Q. Did the Essanay Company subsequently become a licensee of the Motion Picture Patents Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you have anything to do with the organization of the Motion Picture Patents Company? A. No, sir. 3 Q. You were never a stockholder or Director in that company? A. No, sir. Q. Why did you want a license from the Motion Picture Patents Company? A. I thought that if the Biograph Company joined with the Edison Company the legal warfare would be ended, and it would then look like a better business proposition and more safe to go ahead, and the litigation would stop and we had something definite and desirable to proceed with. Q. During the year 190S were you in competition with the other Edison licensees, and I am speaking now of the pro 4 ducing end of your business? A. Yes, sir, indeed. Q. In what ways were you competing with the other licensees? A. In the production of photoplays, the engaging of people, the building of machinery to turn out superior work, and in most every way. Q. Did you make any special efforts to stimulate interest on the part of tlie exhibitors in your pictures? A. Yes, by advertising, and in fact we did everything possible to stimulate interest in our pictures, and created a demand for them over the pictures of other makers.