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 #:
000555
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.

George K. Spoor, Direct Examination. 121)97 tion express any such purpose or intention? A. No, sir, I never did hear anything of the kind. Q. Mr. Spoor, what became of your exchanges, the George K. Spoor & Company exchange? A. I sold it to the General Film Company. Q. Were the operations of that exchange confined to Chicago and the adjacent territory principally? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you find that business a profitable one for a year or so before you sold it? A. No, not as profitable as it should have been or was only the year before that. It was declining right along. Q. Who started the negotiations between you and the General Film Company for the purchase of your exchange, if you recall? A. I offered it to them. Q. You were satisfied with the price that you got for it, were you? A. Yes, sir, indeed. Q. Did you ever hold any office in the General Film Company other than that of a Director? A. No, sir. Q. Then did you or did you not know anything about the details of the negotiations for the purchase of the various exchanges? A. I did not. Q. Will you state the number of weekly releases of the Essanay Company during the years 1910, 1911, 1912 and 1913? A. In 1909 and part of 1910 we had one release a week ; in part of 1910 and part of 1911 we had two ; the last part of 1911 and into 1912 we had three; and then we increased later in 1912 and through 1913 to four and five, within a few weeks. The last increase was within two months. Mr. Grosvenor: Have you given the present number? The Witness: And the present number is five releases, four single reels and one double reel, which makes six reels. Mr. Grosvenor: Does that include any specials you may use from time to time? The Witness: That does not include any of the specials. During this past Summer in addition to that we supplied some twenty or twenty-two negatives as specials, made as specials.