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 #:
00027
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.

2J among the several States, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. In the Union Pacific case, the business which was competitive between the Union Pacific and the Southern Pacific was but a comparatively small part of the sum total of all the traffic carried over the two railroads, comprising only .88 (less than one) per cent of the tonnage of the Southern Pacific and 3.10 per cent of the tonnage of the Union Pacific (226 U. S., 76). It was urged by the railroads that, in view of this fact, only an incidental restraint of trade had resulted from their combination such as ought not to be held within the law. The court, however held (p. 88) that this was a part of commerce within the meaning of the statute. (See our main brief, pp. 258, et seq.) Mr. Fox testified that the largest theaters in New York are licensed theaters. He testified on February 27, 1913, that 95 per cent of the large theaters in Greater New York are licensed by the Patents Company. He said he did not know of more than one place where unlicensed pictures were shown in a large theater, and that the same was true in Newark, Springfield, New Haven, and Bridgeport (II, 699, fol. 2). This testimony was not contradicted. Mr. Sawyer, of the Kinemacolor Company, testified that more of the higher type houses in the United States used licensed service than unlicensed (II, 741, fol. 3).