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 #:
000318
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.

3324 Harry N. Marvin, Recross Examination. papers of the City of New York are giving considerable space to descriptions of moving picture scenarios and dramas at the present time? A. A number of New York dailies are giving a very considerable amount of space to such descriptions. Recross examination by Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Mr. Marvin, this list does not purport to give a list of all the pictures released today by the licensed producers, does it? A. I do not know what it purports to give. Q. Whether it purports to give it or not, it does not give a complete list of the films released by the licensed producers today, does it? A. It does not appear to give a complete list of licensed or unlicensed pictures released today, and the article does not seem to indicate any such intention, it stating at the head of the article: "New releases briefly classified for those who seek good programs." Q. Does this list give a list of all the pictures that are released today by the licensed producers? A. I do not think so, but I do not know what pictures are released today by the licensed producers. Q. Is it not the fact that the list includes some pictures of unlicensed producers, which releases are not released today, but on days following of this week? A. I do not know, but from reading the accounts here given, I should suppose that all of these pictures had been released either today or previous to today. Q. That list of unlicensed pictures is not a list of today's releases, is it? A. I don't think so. Mr. Kingsley: Counsel for the defendants offer in evidence certified copies of the following letters patent of the United States, to wit, Edison Re-Issue Patent No. 12,037, dated September 30th, 1902. The same is received in evidence and is marked Defendants' Exhibit 185. Mr. Kingsley: We offer in evidence Edison ReIssue Patent No. 13,329, dated December 5th, 1911. The same is received in evidence and is marked Defendants' Exhibit 180.