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 #:
000586
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Government & Law
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.

3028 Defendants' Exhibit No. 155. Defendants' Exhibit No. 155. STATEMENT AS OF JANUARY 30, 1911, SHOWING NUMBER OF PLACES IN THE UNITED STATES IN WHICH MOTION PICTURES WERE EXHIBITED. (Separated as to Licensees and Non-licensees of the Motion Picture Patents Company.) Non State Licensees Licensees Total Differences Maine 42 36 78 6— New Hampshire 33 25 58 8— Vermont 29 28 57 1— Massachusetts 181 108 289 73— Rhode Island 21 22 43 1 Connecticut 76 40 116 36— New York 662 447 1109 215— New Jersey 170 130 300 40— Pennsylvania 633 436 1069 197— Delaware 9 9 18 Dist. of Columbia 36 29 65 7 — Maryland 78 79 157 1 Virginia 49 48 97 1— West Virginia 55 51 106 4— Ohio 485 332 817 153— Indiana 215 230 445 15 Illinois 392 439 831 47 Kentucky 42 64 106 22 Michigan 153 198 351 45 Minnesota 98 90 188 8— Wisconsin 64 170 234 106 North Dakota 22 13 35 9— South Dakota 13 38 51 25 Iowa 146 124 270 22— Nebraska 79 63 142 16— Missouri 201 230 431 29 Kansas 111 141 252 30 North Carolina 23 38 61 15 South Carolina 12 17 29 5 Tennessee 31 32 63 1 Georgia 32 31 63 1—