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 000649 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 #:
000649
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 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.

GENERAL INDEX. lix Defendants' Exhibits, Continued: vol. page 105 Contract between Theatre Film Supply Co., Birmingham, Ala., and General Film Co., dated Aug. 23, 1910 VI 3170 166 Letter, General Film Co. to Theatre Film Supply Co., March 21, 1912 VI 3184 167 Letter, Theatre Film Supply Co. to J. J. Kennedy on letterhead of Southern Amusement & Supply Co., Aug. 21, 1911 VI 3186 108 Letter, J. J. Kennedy to A. R. Boone, President, Theatre Film Supply Co., Aug. 26, 1911 . VI 3188 169 Letter, Theatre Film Supply Co. to J. J. Kennedy, Aug. 31, 1911 VI 3189 170 Letter, Theatre Film Supply Co. to J. J. Kennedy, Sept. 9, 1911 VI 3190 171 Letter, J. J. Kennedy to Theatre Film Supply Co., Dee. 29, 1910 VI 3191 172 Statement of cost of branches of General Film Co. as per balance sheet of December 30, 1911 VI 3200 173 Skipped. 174 Motion Picture1 Camera, known as the Warwick Camera VI 3261 175 Projecting Machine, known as the Power Projecting Machine VI 3261 176 Negative Motion Picture Film VI 3261