Memorandum for the the Motion Picture Patents Company and the General Film Company concerning the investigation of their business by the Department of Justice / submitted by M.B. Philip and Francis T. Homer. (1913)

Record Details:

Title:
Memorandum for the the Motion Picture Patents Company and the General Film Company concerning the investigation of their business by the Department of Justice / submitted by M.B. Philip and Francis T. Homer.
Date:
1913
Publisher:
Washington, D.C. : United States. Department of Justice
Volume:
Memorandum for the the Motion Picture Patents Company and the General Film Company concerning the investigation of their business by the Department of Justice
Leaf #:
00087
Language:
English
Collection:
Early Cinema and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
The Museum of Modern Art Library, New York
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
November 30, 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.

not covering, in hia opinion, a positive motion picture film, but only iK-^-jative taotion nicturo filn, that v^;iit n>: coils ti;e •'combination" h -.9 beon founded. He is in error ns t th(:r.e opiniona. In tno first place, we have shown thr.t the diffci'ent agreements are not based principally upon tnic JCdison film rnissue, but upon t>i e lawf.il rights of the Patents fiorcpany under its patents covering projecting machines, and, secondly, thin Edison film reissue is not a wcrthleas patent. .Ve have heretofore pointed out, what the Court of Appeals, in the oecrnd decision upon the Kdiaon camera reissue held to be tie invention covered ny the claiae, and thp.t noces^irily, the positive notion picture reproduced fro-n the negative m>if'ft by such ir.~ vontion had peculiarities n.n'i cliaracteristics vhlcb were absolutely now with Kdison, en<^ wore not found in the prior art anyy/here. In the next place, the iidison film roiaoue claims a positive motion picture film, ar.d not :nereiy a negative notion picture film, as he supposes. A suit was brought by the ;'atents Company uijainat the Chicago Film Exchange in the ouprorie Couii. of t }ie District of Columbia, in which a large amount of evidence was taken, and able counaei were employed for the plaintiff and the defendant, Judge 'vnllace being one of the latter, and the film -/il