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 #:
000537
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.

Alfred Weiss, Reckoss Examination. 3389 I think it was ten weeks after that that they made a payment of two thousand and, I think, a few hundred odd dollars,"? A. That is correct. Q. You were asked that question and you made the answer which I have read you? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you then asked this question by the Master, and did you make the answer which I shall read you? "The Master : Were you receiving a salary as manager for the General Film Company during those ten weeks? A. Yes, sir."? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he then ask you this question and did you make this answer : "Q. During those ten weeks, as far as you now recall, what were the approximate profits of the exchange? A. From $300 to $500 a week"? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you so answer him? A. Yes, sir. Q. And did you, during those ten weeks from July 4th, 1910, make a profit of from three thousand to five thousand dollars for the General Film Company for the aggregate period? A. I never stated three thousand to five thousand dollars. Q. All right. Did you during the ten wTeeks succeeding July 4th, 1910, make a profit of three hundred to five hundred dollars a week? A. Yes, sir. Q. For the Alfred Weiss Branch of the General Film Company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were the deferred cash payments made to you as they became due? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the preferred stock delivered to you? A. Yes, sir. Q. Has the preferred stock carried a dividend of seven per cent, per annum? A. Yes, sir. Q. Have the dividends on this preferred stock been paid to you promptly as they became due? A. Yes, sir. Q. I show you a weekly statement of business done, Alfred Weiss Branch of the General Film Company, week ending August 10th, 1910, and signed Alfred Weiss, Manager. Was that statement made by you? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it correct? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Kingsley : I ask to have it marked for identification. The paper identified by the witness is marked "Defendants' Exhibit for Identification No. 207."