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 #:
000478
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 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.

3330 Frederick C. Beach, Direct Examination. is not a standard book upon the motion picture art, or any other art. The Witness: I consider it to be a standard compilation on the art. I do not know that it is the original ideas of the author. Mr. Kingsley: I move to strike out the answer as being incompetent, immaterial and irrelevant, having no probative force, and not binding upon any of these defendants. By Mr. Grosvenor: Q. Where is Mr. Talbot to-day, Mr. Beach? A. He is a resident of England, South Sea, England. Mr. Kingsley: Do you know where he is to-day? The Witness: I do not know, no, sir. Mr. Grosvenor: I offer this book in evidence, to wit, the book referred to by the witness, "Motion Pictures, How They are Made and Worked," by Frederick A. Talbot, published in 1912. This exhibit is offered for the purpose of having readily available for use as a reference by the Court and counsel, a standard history and description of the motion picture art. I herewith present two copies, one copy for counsel for the defendants, and one for the Examiner. I shall present at the final hearing, three additional copies of this book, one for each of the judges who may hear the case. The Examiner: The book is marked Petitioner's Exhibit No. 268. Mr. Kingsley: I object to the introduction of the book entitled "Moving Pictures1' by Frederick A. Talbot, in evidence in this case, on the ground that it is incompetent, immaterial and irrelevant, that according to the testimony of the witness now on the stand, it is nothing but a compilation, that there is nothing in his evidence and nothing in the proof in this case to indicate that it is a standard work, that there is nothing in evidence to indicate