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 000282 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 #:
000282
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.

3288 Harry N. Marvin, Cross Examination. arrows, illustrate features of mechanism of an earlier date, all of which are found embodied in the mechanism illustrated in the central figure, as indicated by the arrows/' That is an accurate statement of the diagram? A. I think so. Q. Where did you get this projecting machine which you introduced as Defendants' Exhibit No. 175, page 3201? A. I got that from the Nicholas Power Company. Q. When did you get it from them? A. A few days ago. Q. And what did you ask them for? A. My instruct ions to the person who saw them was to get a machine, one of their types of machines such as they were putting out at the beginning of 1908. Q. That is, to get a Model No. 5? A. No, I did not refer to the number of the model. Q. What form of a shutter has that projecting machine? A. That has a Pross shutter, two-wing type. Q. I will ask you to open the projecting machine and examine the shutter. A. (The witness complies with the request. ) Q. What do you find here (indicating Defendants' Exhibit No. 175) ? How many do you find? A. It is a two-wing shutter. Q. Then it is not a Pross shutter, is it? A. It is a Pross shutter, as T stated before. Q. I thought your testimony was to the effect that the Pross shutter was a shutter with three apertures or wings. A. I don't remember having testified so. Q. What is the distinguishing characteristic of a Pross shutter if it can be of two wings or three wings? A. A Pross shuter may be of any number of wings. It may even be of one wing. The characteristic of the Pross shutter is that it, shall intercept the light during the time when the film is being moved, and one or more times during the interval of pause and illumination. Q. Then if you take an Armat shutter and run it fast enough, it will serve the same purpose as the Pross shutter? A. That is not true, because the Armat shutter is arranged and geared in connection with the other mechanism so as to intercept the light only during the period of movement of the film. If, however, you wish to take a shutter constructed like the Armat shutter and change the gearing so as to change its mechanical function so that it may revolve twice for every