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:

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.

with thi3 price paid for their property by the General Fil:a Cofflpriny. The General Film Company employed such of the persons rrho owr ed such fllin exchangao, and their employees who were willin.'!; to accept employmert , as it thought desirable for itn buf^neoa, and mnny of t lio ra are nov in its employ. A n\»mber of ths li conned exclianf.e?: voluntarily teminotod tho5r licon<?es vdt h the h'atents Conoany and are in buoinesa to-day, and, according to advertiae::iont3 , their owners are doing a large and profitable business. For a long time before the orgar.ization of the General Film Company owners of exchanges and exJ'ititore complained of unfair competition and dishonest methods, and many times requested the I'otion i^ictu re atents Company to doviae some means for correctinc tneoe e-vils. In each instance the Ijot ion Picture i'atents Gompajy declined to interfere, and did not interfere, except to cancel licenses in cases where exchanp.es or exhibitors deliberately and flagrantly violated their licenses, or were puilty of such dishonest and objectionable practices as proved injuriour to tl^e busi -56