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.
208 ^> ^> ^> The Motion Picture Industry
critics of the industry charge that protection is used to restrain trade. Undoubtedly, in many instances the desire to limit competition is the compelling motive. The distributors and their affiliated chains are accused individually and collectively of conspiring against the so-called independent exhibitor through unreasonable protection. Certain chain operators are held to have demanded unreasonable grants, both as to the length of time and as to the area in which the protection is applicable. Distributors complain because of retarded bookings and delayed receipt of income. The independent exhibitors in many cases are charged with lack of cooperation and with unreasonableness, in particular with an unwillingness to accept a fairly good plan because it is not perfect.
Perhaps the most significant complaint was that brought by the United States Government x in April, 1929, charging the Fox-West Coast Theaters and 9 2 motion picture distributors with combining to violate the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The indictment, a criminal charge, held that Harold B. Franklin, president of the West Coast Circuit and the theaters contained therein, and all the distributor defendants were conspiring to deprive unaffiliated exhibitors of their right and opportunity to purchase and show motion pictures in competition with West Coast Theaters. The charge was directed specifically against the defendants' conspiracies against those exhibitors charging admission prices of 10 cents or less and against those granting premiums.
The contentions of the defendants' attorneys were summarized as follows:
The West Coast Circuit was entitled, in its dealings with each individual producer, to obtain the benefit of its large-scale buying power.
1 Action filed in the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of California, Southern Division.
2 The 9 distributors were the Fox Film Corporation; Paramount Publix Corporation; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures Corporation; United Artists Corporation; Universal Pictures Corporation; First National Pictures, Incorporated; Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc.; Vitagraph, Inc.; Pathe Exchange, Incorporated; and Vitagraph Company of California. {Motion Picture Herald, April 27, 1929, p. 25.)