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 #:
00034
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.

28 preme Court in an exhaustive opinion by Mr. Justice Hughes condemned the arrangement. It held that putting the restraints in the form of restrictions contained in agency contracts did not make the scheme a lawful one. The case at bar is far stronger than the Dr. Miles Medical Co. case, for the decision there concerned the acts of a single manufacturer distributing his product in commerce. There was no combination in that case. There was no attempt to control by agreement of numerous manufacturers the distribution of the products of each. Here we have a case where every restraint and unlawful condition was adopted by agreement of the different manufacturers. Subsequently, in Bobbs-Mcrrill Co. v. Straus, 210 U. S., 339, and in Baiter v. O'Donnell, 229 U. S., 1, the Supreme Court applied to copyrighted books and to patented articles the ruling which it had made in the Dr. Miles Medical Co. case in respect to unpatented articles. It is true that in the latter cases there was no attempt to retain title. That, however, does not affect the case. " The Sherman Act embraces every conceivable act which can possibly come within the spirit or purpose of the prohibitions of the law without regard to the garb in which such acts are clothed." (Mr. Chief Justice White in the Tobacco opinion, 221 U. S., 106.) The Sanatogen case decided that the patentee may not control the price from the jobber to the