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 #:
000588
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.

3030 Defendants' Exhibit No. 15G. Defendants' Exhibit No. 156. STATEMENT AS OF JULY 3, 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 50 31 81 19— New Hampshire 29 23 52 6— Vermont 36 24 60 12— Massachusetts 169 124 293 45— Rhode Island 22 15 37 7— Connecticut 69 49 118 20— New York 714 545 1259 169— New Jersey 191 189 380 2— Pennsylvania 559 507 1066 52— Delaware 9 15 24 6 Dist. of Col. 36 38 74 2 Maryland 59 92 151 33 Virginia 53 58 111 5 West Virginia 63 49 112 14— Ohio 425 453 878 28 Indiana 200 280 480 80 Illinois 380 478 858 98 Kentucky 56 89 145 33 Michigan 149 216 365 67 Minnesota 94 84 178 10— Wisconsin 68 165 233 97 North Dakota 18 20 38 2 South Dakota 19 34 53 15 Iowa 114 190 304 76 Nebraska 75 85 160 10 Missouri 220 226 446 6 Kansas 100 151 251 51 North Carolina 35 44 79 9 South Carolina 17 20 37 3 Tennessee 40 31 71 9— Georgia 39 47 86 8