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 6
Leaf #:
00057
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.

SlEGMUND LUBIN, REDIRECT EXAMINATION. 3089 I cannot say that they all signed it; I don't remember exactly how many were there. Q. Are you in litigation with this Mr. Swaab that you referred to on direct examination? A. Have I what? Q. Do you have any lawsuit with Mr. Swaab? A. I think there is a lawsuit for some Alms which was taken over here at some time. Q. And these films were taken at the time that his rental exchange was taken possession of, when his license was cancelled? Mr. Kingsley : I object to the question. The Witness: I don't know, I can't tell you. I don't know anything further. By Mr. Grosvenor : Q. But you do know that you and he have a lawsuit? A. Yes, sir, we have, I think so. Q. Is this the same Swaab who got a verdict of twenty thousand dollars by a jury in Philadelphia against the Vitagraph Company, two or three days ago? A. It is the same Swaab, I think so. Q. And that suit against the Vitagraph Company related to the same matter that your suit with Swaab relates to? A. I don't know. In my suit he only got fifteen hundred dollars, or twelve hundred dollars. Redirect examination by Mr. Kingsley: Q. Your suit was reversed by the higher Court? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is Mr. Berst a Director and officer of the General Film Company? A. Now? Q. Yes, at the present? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is he connected with any manufacturer at all, at present? A. No, sir. Recross examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. What position does Mr. Berst have with the General Film Company? A. He is Secretary.