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 000317 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 #:
000317
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.

Defendants' Exhibit No. 181. 3323 farm house at Waterloo and the last battle of the Old Guard, is realistic. The number of excellent individual performances by soldiers in the ranks is great. The play made so great a hit with the management that an agreement for its retention for a run was made by telephone. An artistic modern film that followed was "The Floor Above'' (R. & M., four reels), from E. Phillips Oppenheim's "Mystery of Charlecot Mansions." James Kirkwood has staged with great care this story of the rich amateur detective who moves a slain man from the rooms of his sweetheart's actress sister to those of another tenant above. The completeness with which the difficult action is traced up and down stairs is to be admired as much as the fine acting in a restrained style. By Mr. Kingsley: Q. I show you Defendants' Exhibit No. 181, and call your attention to the fourth column, entitled "What Is Worth Seeing in the Movies To-day," which gives a list of motion picture dramas shown in the various theatres in the City of New York to-day, and which contains the names of the producers. Will you look at that list and tell us what dramas it contains which were produced by the licensed producers, and what dramas it contains which were produced by unlicensed producers? A. This account contains synopses of the following motion picture dramas produced by producers who are licensees of the defendant Motion Picture Patents Company, that is, "Never Again," Vitagraph; "Putting One Over," Edison; "The Battle of Elderbush Gulch," Biograph. It also contains synopses of the following motion picture dramas produced by producers who are not licensees of the defendant Motion Picture Patents Company, that is, "In the Days of His Youth," Rex; "Barnyard Flirtations," Keystone; "The Head Waiter," Frontier; "Forgetting," Imp; "The Surgeon's Experiment,'1 Majestic ; "The Smugglers of Sligo,1' Reliance; "The Slippery Spy," Eclair; "The Battle of Chili and Bean," Apollo; "The Town of Nazareth," American. Q. Have you observed whether or not the dailv news