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 #:
000590
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.

3032 Defendants' Exhibit No. 157. Defendants' Exhibit No. 157. STATEMENT AS OF DECEMBER 18, 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 2 Maine 56 30 86 26— New Hampshire 38 22 60 16— Vermont 37 20 57 17— Massachusetts 217 119 336 98— Rhode Island 27 18 (18) 45 9— Connecticut 79 54 133 25— New York 783 445 1228 338— New Jersey 201 149 350 52— Pennsylvania Gil 528 1169 113— Delaware 9 13 22 4 8 Dist. of Col. 40 23 63 17— Maryland 71 97 171 23 Virginia 54 41 95 13— West Virginia 69 66 135 3— Ohio 461 420 881 41— Indiana 235 251 486 16 Illinois 521 442 963 79— Kentucky 76 07 143 9— Michigan 185 213 398 28 Minnesota 127 96 223 31— Wisconsin 114 165 279 51 4 North Dakota 24 21 45 3— South Dakota 29 32 6L 3 Iowa 167 202 369 35 Nebraska 95 95 190 Missouri 237 200 437 37— Kansas 124 Ml 265 17 North Carolina 38 38 76 South Carolina 17 17 34 Tennessee 46 35 81 11— Georgia 52 32 84 20—