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 #:
000571
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.

H. M. Newsome, Direct Examination. 3013 Q. Did the General Film Company, after buying the Mitchell Film Exchange, enter the Birmingham territory and cut prices as much as fifty per cent,? A. They were already there, but they never did get but this one customer. Q. And that was before the sale? A. Yes, sir, and they had their whole output in this one theatre, but there were not as many reels then as there is now. Q. Do you know whether or not there was any price cutting by the General Film Company, after it purchased the Mitchell exchange? A. No, sir, I didn't hear of any. Q. Up to the time of the consolidation of the Birmingham Film Exchange and the Theatre Film & Supply Company, had your exchange been making any money? A. No, sir, it had been losing. Q. How long did you continue to operate your exchange after this consolidation? A. You mean until we sold it? Q. Yes? A. We consolidated in November or December of 1909, and we sold in September of 1910, nearly a year. Q. Did you make any money after the consolidation? A. We made some money. Q. Did you consider the business very profitable? A. No, sir. Q. What happened in September of 1910, with respect to your exchange? A. My company? Q. Yes. A. I sold out to the General Film Company. Q. Who started the negotiations for that sale? A. I did. Q. State what you did? A. I came to New York to see them in regard to selling out to them. Q. Was that pursuant to any previous appointment that had been made by letter or telegraph? A. No, sir, that was the first move. Q. You may state whom you saw about the sale. A. 1 went into their office in New York. Q. Who do you mean by "their office"? A. The General Film Company's, and I believe I first met Mr. Percy Waters, and told him my business, and he sent for Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Kennedy was in the building, and he came out and I met him and told him my business. I told him that I had come up to see him about selling my exchange. He says, "Well, I don't know that we want to buy any more exchanges," or "any exchange," probably he said, "right now/' And we talked along and discussed