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.
Arbitration ^>^^^>^>^^>^>281
Article 3 was designed to prevent bicycling.28 The government contended that under the Standard Exhibition Contract every exhibitor charged with bicycling must have the question of his violation of the United States Copyright Act heard and determined by a board, every member of which probably was prejudiced against him and every member of which might have a direct interest in the outcome of the matter. Every exhibitor who competed with a bicycler had a direct interest in removing his unfair competition. Every distributor who had contracts or might have contracts with a bicycler had a direct interest in preventing his unauthorized exhibition of pictures. This charge of general prejudice was supported by two types of evidence. First, at the Film Board of Trade Conference in June, 1927, Mr. Hess stated :
It is becoming more and more difficult, particularly in view of the fact that we are so active now in trying to run down bicyclers, to have distributor arbitrators who have no indirect interest in the matter that is presented to them for determination because when we find evidence of bicycling we generally find that practically every company is affected Necessarily if I am sitting as an arbitrator upon a claim
made by Famous Players for bicycling its pictures, and I too have a claim against the same exhibitor, I have an indirect interest in the result of the controversy, and I am properly subject to challenge on the ground that I will be or will be presumed to be prejudiced.
Second, the danger of a biased award was further increased by virtue of the fact that the investigation of bicycling cases was authorized, financed, and directed by the Copyright Protection Bureau. This bureau was created by the national and regional distributors in 1926 as a result of an investigation made of those alleged violations on the part of exhibitors.29 This control by the home office in bicycling
28 The term "bicycling" is as old as the industry. It was "the practice of many an exhibitor to contract for a picture for one theater and then with his bicycle to ride it to another theater and get a rental for it or to show it in another theater that he owned and operated himself".
29 The defendants contended that the establishment of the bureau was thoroughly supported, even suggested, by the exhibitors and that the exhibitor representatives "are whole-heartedly in favor of any plan that will help to wipe out this evil".