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.
136 MOTION PICTURE COMMISSION. Mr. ScHECHTER. Probably $5 for the original reel. Mr. Towner. Would that be an exorbitant charge? Mr. ScHECHTER. It would come down to this, if my contention is at all tenable, that even though there is a Federal censorship there will still be a State censorship. The State will always be jealous of its own rights, and if the Federal Government should charge $5 there is no reason why the State should not charge an equal amount cr half that amount, and if the Federal Government should charge $5 and each State $2, it would be more than $10,000, which would have to be paid, and not by the manufacturers. Mr. Towner. I just asked for the approximation. I am trying to ascertain what the result would be. Mr. ScHECHTER. As to the amount of money, I think that $5 a reel would give about $50,000 or $G0.000. Dr. Chase. Did you not say that there would be about $2,000 re- ceived from 4,000 copies each month ? Mr. ScHECHTER. Two thousand original reels? Dr. Chase, Four thousand duplicate copies each month ? Mr. SciTECHTER. Copics ? Dr. Chase. Yes, sir. Mr. ScHECHTER. There would be 4,000 copies a week. Dr. Chase. I misunderstood the statement. I understood you to sa}' that there were about 4,000 duplicates issued each month instead of each week. Mr. ScHECHTER. The Universal puts out 800, the Mutual the same: that is 1,G00: the General Film about double that number. 3.200. and then the others 800, which gives 4.000 a week. Mr. ToAVNER. I was going to ask you what justification you could give for charging 50 cents for each duplicate film? Dr. Chase. You will notice that the bill does not require that the copies shall be shown to the commission. Mr. Tow^-er. I knoAv that. That is the reason why there would not be very much justification for charging for it. Dr. Chase. That would still leave the power with tlie commission to require it of certain manufticlurers if they found that they could not trust them. Mr. Towner. Could not trust them how? Dr. Chase. Could not trust them to make absolute copies of the film which had been licensed. That would depend on their good faith. Mr. Towner. That would not be, of course, if they are absolute copies. If tliey are spurious copies then they would be subject to the penalties and punishment of the h\w. It would not be the licensed film: it would l)e something diti'erent entirely? Dr. Chase. That is the way the bill is drawn, with the thought that possibly there might be so many s[)iirious copies appearing that the commission should be given the power, if necessary, to demand tiial the duplicate fihns shall be submitted to it and they would then at- tach the seals which would i)rove that ihey weiv dui>li('ales of the original. Mr. ToAVNER. But you see we have vo n.eet this contention: The film has been licensed and you have a right to make r.ny charge f()r licensins: von choose, but that is all vou liave the right to do in this