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 #:
000307
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.

Custody of Defts' Exs. Nos. 174 to 183 Inclusive, 3313 suits were decided adversely to Edison with the single exception that in the last action the Court found that three of the four claims of the Edison reissue were valid if limited to the special form of camera shown and described in his patent. The camera of the Edison patent in question, is not, however, capable of producing long lengths of picture film, and has not been used by the Edison Manufacturing Company for a number of years, if ever, for the commercial manufacture of standard films. On the contrary, not only the Edison Company, but others engaged in the manufacture of such films have been compelled to adopt the camera of the Latham Patent No. 707,934, dated April 2G, 1902. The American Mutoscope and Biograph Company owns the Latham Patent and lias a suit pending against the Edison Company for infringing it. AMERICAN MUTOSCOPE & BIOGRAPH CO. By Mr. Grosvexor: Q. Before giving your testimony on direct examination by Mr. Church relating to these matters, did you refresh 3 your memory by reading those exhibits which I have just introduced? A. I did not. Stipulation as to Custody of Defendants' Exhibits Nos. 174 to 183 Inclusive. It is stipulated that Defendants' Exhibits Nos. 174 to 183 inclusive shall remain in the custody of counsel for the defendants, the same to be accessible to Government counsel if desired, and to be produced by the defendants at final hearing. Whereupon, at 12.30 o'clock P. M. on this Saturday, the 28th day of March, 1014. the hearings are adjourned until Monday, March 30th, 1914, at 2 o'clock P. M., at Boom 159, Hotel Manhattan, New York City.