United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others (1914)

Record Details:

Title:
United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others
Date:
1914
Publisher:
Washington, D.C. : United States. Government Printing Office
Volume:
United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others
Leaf #:
0009
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
December 21, 2023
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




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.

3 the patentee's business. Whereas, as a matter of fact, not one of the conditions was imposed upon the use of any patented article in the normal and usual development of the patentee's business, but each condition took its birth in a combination between the owners of the several patents. As an instance of the above, we respectfully direct the attention of the court to the examination of the restrictions contained in the brief filed by Mr. Melville Church, beginning page 94 et seq. Throughout Mr. Church's recital of the restrictions and his discussion of the agreements there is not a suggestion or an intimation that these restrictions were entered into by combination of the various owners. His discussion proceeds upon the assumption that one company owning all these patents was imposing the various patent restrictions. He overlooks the manner in which the Patents Company acquired the patents on December 18, 1908. There is no reference to the way in which the Patents Company obtained the patents or to the meetings of the manufacturers. In two recent cases of the Supreme Court under the antitrust law the court pointed out that acts and contracts which under ordinary circumstances when done by individuals may be lawful become unlawful when done by many. These cases are the Anthracite Coal case (reviewed in our main brief, pages 266 et seq.) and the Pacific & Arctic Navigation Co. case. (See our main brief, pages