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 <^><^<^<^><^><^<^><^> 283
considered to be unethical." The government therefore contends that the Boards of Arbitration become in effect merely collection agencies, that awards are made primarily for collection purposes, offering as evidence that, in the case of a typical Board of Arbitration, of 275 awards made, 238 required payment of money damages. Clause 4, therefore, "arbitrarily imposed upon the exhibitors by the agreement of the defendant distributors, precludes any negotiations relative to the terms of payment irrespective of the financial and credit standing of the exhibitors".
The argument clearly involved two issues, not one. First, could it be contended that Boards of Arbitration were merely collection agencies because a very large proportion of the awards called for the payment of money damages, and, secondly, did the clause cited preclude negotiations relative to terms of payment?
It was to be expected that a great many of the disputes calling for arbitration would involve a question of film rentals, and it is a little difficult to see wherein a penalty other than a penalty of money damages could be effective in such cases; even in cases where film rentals were not involved it was not always easy to devise any fair penalty other than a financial one. Damage to someone had been done, and for the purpose both of providing recompense for such harm already done and of preventing its recurrence, financial awards would appear reasonable. Suspension of service on the part of distributors, either partial or complete, might and did serve in some cases. Yet it is not clear that these other types of penalties would render in the long run any more substantial justice — in cases, for instance, where violation of run, violation of protection, or damaged prints were involved. Certainly arbitration practices in other fields provide very substantially for financial penalties. There can be no question that the distributors in supporting compulsory arbitration had in mind that one primary purpose would be to insure financial protection against ex