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.
Block Booking <^ <^> <^ <^> <^> <^> <^ 157
If the theory of Commission's counsel were correct that the alleged compulsion exercised by Famous Players-Lasky Corporation consists in disposing of its entire block of pictures, and nothing less, to one of two competitors to the exclusion of the other, a statistical examination of its contracts with exhibitors should show no sales at all to many exhibitors and large numbers of sales of all the pictures offered in its various blocks. . . . Instead of the suggested showing they demonstrate clearly that the vast majority of the sales of Paramount pictures have been for relatively small portions of the whole number of pictures offered in the various blocks. They demonstrate clearly that the practice has been for exhibitors to select their favorite subjects and to refuse to buy the pictures which they do not desire.
Commission's counsel, however, rely upon the testimony of some 16 exhibitors who testified in some form or other that they had been forced to take all or none of certain blocks of Paramount pictures in order to get any of the pictures in the block.
In direct answer to this evidence respondent produced the contracts which these very exhibitors had made covering the blocks of pictures with respect to which they had testified. These contracts showed that these 16 exhibitors had actually entered into 322 separate contracts for Paramount pictures in Groups IV, V, and VI, each contract resulting from a separate negotiation. These groups are all the pictures for the respective seasons 1920-1921, 1921-1922, and 1922-1923, and the groups were in turn divided into varying numbers of blocks. Of these 322 separate contracts, only 31 were for all of the pictures in any block, while 98 contracts were for but a single picture each. Can there possibly be any more convincing evidence that respondent has not practiced the sales policy of "all or none", than the fact that the Commission's own witnesses who testified that they were compelled to buy "all or none" entered into less than 10% of all their contracts with respondent for all the pictures in any one block, while 90% of their contracts were for less than all the pictures in the block? ....
Aside from the fact that their evidence seems entirely unworthy of belief, there is another reason why the Commission should not accept it as proof that Famous Players-Lasky Corporation has followed the policy of selling its pictures on the basis of all or none. The undisputed evidence in this proceeding shows that during each of the three theatrical seasons mentioned respondent had at least 12,000 theatrical customers. Of these customers, Commission's counsel produced only 16, who testified that the Company had sold or attempted to sell its pictures to them on the basis of all or none. The testimony of these 16 witnesses is not enough to establish proof of the use of