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.
220 ^> ^ ^> The Motion Picture Industry
tiations on the ground that in the state of Texas, an agreement on admission price was, according to legal opinion, a violation of the Texas antitrust law.
The Dallas association issued the following statement:
The delegates from the Allied Theater Owners of Texas elected to confer with other exhibitor representatives and a committee from the Dallas Film Board of Trade regarding a plan of zoning and protection for this state proposed by the committee from the Film Board of Trade, have received such proposed plan and submitted the same in essence to the convention of Allied Theater Owners of Texas in a specially called session at Dallas, July 28. The essence of the plan was laid before the convention in the presence of Mr. Joe Luckett, a member of the Film Board of Trade Committee, who stated that the general outline of the proposed plan was correctly reported.
Basically, the plan is divided in two general heads, both to apply to cities of 40,000 population or over (some 15 or 16 in number) :
(a) Revision and standardization of zoning and protection now existing within the corporate limits of the above-mentioned cities, such revision to take into consideration and be largely based on admissions charged.
(b) "Extra Territorial" protection, in the form of prior dating privileges granted to first run theaters in these same cities, covering against theaters in all towns within the radius of 25 miles.
The convention, after considerable open discussion, voted unanimously to reject the entire plan, and to refuse to become a party to any such agreement. The reasons expressed for such action were as follows :
Proposal (a). We feel that the basis of this plan would have the effect to control admission prices and to force a theater to raise prices or to obtain pictures so old that box office value would be negligible. Such action we feel would constitute a direct violation of the AntiTrust laws of our state ; and if the truth became known generally, it would certainly bring grave criticism upon the entire industry, for it deprives the public of the cheap amusement to which they have become accustomed over a period of years.
Proposal (b). This we oppose even more strenuously, although the immediate practical effect might be small. Comparatively few would be affected (probably 20 or 25) and possibly even these would not be seriously damaged. However, we would object to this just as strenuously if the radius were 10 miles and not a single member of ours affected at all.
Our opposition to this step is basic in principle. Neither Dallas nor