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 #:
000698
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.

CV111 GENERAL INDEX. Vitagbaph Co. of America, Continued: vol. page Opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, dated May 16, 1912, in the Matter of Imperial Film Exchange, alleged bankrupt, affirming Order of District Court dismissing Petition and reversing confirmation of Master's Report; Defendants' Exhibit 10a II 997 Writ of Injunction dated Sept, 18, 1900, out of Circuit Court for Southern District of New York on the part of T. A. Edison directed to Vitagraph Co. and Walter Arthur, individually, on Letters Patent 589,168; Defendants' Exhibit 114 IV 1985 Wales, Herbert C. : Direct Examination IV 228G-2292 Cross Examination 2443-2145 Redirect Examination 2445-2447 Recross Examination 2447 Redirect Examination 2447-2448 Recross Examination 2448-2449 Redirect Examination 2449 Warner,, Jacob: Direct Examination V 2777-2782 Waters, Percival L. : Direct Examination V 2901-2974 Cross Examination VI 3072-3080 Redirect Examination 3080 Recross Examination 3080-3081 Redirect Examination 3081 Weiss, Alfred : Direct Examination VI 3364-3368 Cross Examination 3379-3384 Redirect Examination '. 3384-3385 Redirect Examination 3386-3387 Recross Examination 3385-3386 Recross Examination 3387-3391