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)

Page scan 000204 from 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 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 #:
000204
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 12, 2024
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.

3232 Jeremiah J. Kennedy, Cross Examination. and during the year 1911? A. The Executive Committee had no by-laws, and if it had held any meetings, the minutes would have been kept in accordance with the requirements of the company's by-laws. Q. The by-laws of the General Film Company, Petitioner's Exhibit 01, printed in the Record, page 201 et scq., provide, Article VI, Section 9, "Executive Committee," the third paragraph in that section; "The Executive Committee shall exercise all the powers of the Board of Directors while the Board is not in session; shall keep minutes of the business transacted at all its meetings, and shall report to the Board of Directors at each meeting of the Board, all the business that it transacted since the last meeting of the Board.' You may state whether or not any minutes were kept of the meetings of the Executive Committee in 1910 and 1911. A. No minutes could have been kept, for the reason that there were no meetings. Q. You constituted the Executive Committee? A. No, I was Chairman of the Executive Committee, and I drew those by-laws, and the Executive Committe was merely an emergency body to act more quickly than the entire Board could be brought into action. Q. And you, in your own person, exercised all the powers of the Executive Committee, conferring over the telephone with Mr. Smith and Mr. Berst, the other members of the Executive Committee? A. At their request, I acted for them and reported to them informally. Q. What was this dinner at which the subject of forming such a rental exchange, that is, a rental exchange owned by the producers, was broached? A. When was it? Q. Yes. A. I think it was on December 20th, 1909. Q. Was that a meeting held in celebration, that is, on the anniversary of the birth of the Patents Company? A. For convenience, we arranged to get together once a year and discuss all our grievances with each other. It was a purely social affair. Q. That was an idea which you sprung upon the others on the occasion of this anniversary of the formation of the Patents Company? A. It was a suggestion that appeared to me to go right to the point of the difficulties. Q. How many reels does the Biograph Company produce today, a week? A. Well, that is indefinite. It pro