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 #:
00041
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.

35 prior to the combination and by the statements of Mr. Berst. A cursory examination of Talbot's work, " Moving Pictures and How They are Made," and Gibson's " Romance of Modern Photography " furnishes convincing evidence of the want of substance to the claim that the six patents dominate the art. IX. Only six of the sixteen patents enumerated in the agreements are to be considered — defendants have abandoned the other ten. Counsel for the defendants in the course of their arguments acknowledged the accuracy of the statement made during the opening of counsel for the Government, that only six of the sixteen patents named in the license agreement are relied on by them. (See also Mr. Church's brief, p. 12.) We maintain that the licensing arrangement under patents was adopted for the express purpose of effecting a combination in restraint of trade the unlawfulness of which would have been obvious if it had not been given the mask of patents ; that the insertion of ten patents, which are now conceded to be so inconsequential as not to have been mentioned in six volumes of testimony or in the prolonged briefs and arguments of counsel for the defendants, were inserted in the licenses for the express purpose of giving the licenses a more'im