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 000684 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 #:
000684
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.

XC1V GENERAL INDEX. Opinions, Continued : vol. page Opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals District of Columbia, on Film Patent Reissue No. 12,192, by Chief Justice Shepard, dated Dec. 2, 1912; Petitioner's Exhibit 60 . I 175 Opinion of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District, in Lubin Mfg. Co. v. Lewis M. Swaab; Defendants' Exhibit 9 II 888 Opinion in the case of Geo. Melies Co. v. Motion Picture Patents Co. et al., in the. United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, October Term, 1912; Defendants' Exhibit 39 II 1191 Opinion of Judge Coxe in the case of The Goodwin Film & Camera Co. v. Eastman Kodak Co., United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit ; Petitioner's Exhibit 267 VI 3294 Opinion of Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, in the case of Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Independent Moving Picture Company of America (200 Fed., Ill), Aug. 10, 1912, on the Latham Patent No. 707,934; Petitioner's Exhibit 277 VI 3393 Order of District Judge Hough in the Matter of Imperial Film Exchange, alleged bankrupt, confirming the Report of the Special Master and Dismissing the Petition of the Vitagraph Co. and others to have said Exchange adjudged an involuntary bankrupt, June 28, 1910; Defendants' Exhibit 158 II 853 Opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit, dated .May 1(1, 1912, in the Matter of imperial Film Exchange, alleged bankrupt, affirming Order of District Court, dismissing Petition and reversing confirmation of Master's Eeport; Defendants' Exhibit 10a II 997