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

Page scan 00077 from United States of America v. Motion Picture Patents Company and others

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 #:
00077
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:
August 01, 2024
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.

71 sede the earlier agreements until all the testimony in this suit on behalf of the Government had been taken. The modifications effected by the agreements of 1913 are stated in defendants' principal brief, pages 316 et seq. The defendants vigorously assert the lawfulness of every condition and restriction contained in the earlier license agreements, and unless these are pronounced unlawful by this court defendants will undoubtedly replace in the license agreements such conditions as they may have temporarily abandoned in their later agreements. In view of the fact that all the conditions as described in the petition were in force and being observed by the defendants when the petition in this case was filed, they should be declared unlawful. (See authorities cited in our main brief, pp. 242-245.) Mr. Moon's brief contains a curious inaccuracy. He states (p. 34) that Mr. Thomas A. Edison " stands before the bar of this court as a defendant." In this statement he is mistaken. There is no word of evidence in the record connecting Mr. Edison with any of the acts of which the Government complains. It does not appear that he is an officer of any of the defendant companies, nor that he attended any of the meetings at which the unlawful acts were planned. On the other hand, the Government put in evidence Mr. Edison's testimony in an earlier case that he was not the inventor of the film. This evidence was intro