Showmen's Trade Review (Jan-Mar 1947)

SHOWMEN'S TRADE REVIEW. February 8, 1947 9 NATIONAL NEWSREEL Columbia Appeals to U. S. Supreme Court; Attacks Block Booking Ban, Bidding Columbia's Questions In its appeal filed Thursday, Columbia raises the following questions: 1) That the court assumed block-booking to mean conditioning of the sale of one picture with the sale of another, while it actually means selling pictures in blocks. 2) That the court exceeded the regulatory provision of the Sherman Act and had no right to place the defendant in a "strait-jacket" which "compels him to do business in the manner regulated by the court or go out of business." 3) That the decree violates Article V of the Constitution by depriving the defendant of his property without due process of law by compelling him to auction sell. 4) That the decree violates the copyright act, citing the Hartford-Empire case where an attempt to compel licensing of a copyright product was ruled out because of the rights under the copyright. Attorney Frohlieh Claims Order Ignores Plaintitt's Rights Under Copyright By BILL SPECHT News Editor Attacking the statutory court decree on its competitive bidding clauses and those which ban block-booking. Columbia Pictures Attorney Louis Frohlieh Thursday filed an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. The Columbia appeal was entered by complying with the necessary formalities at the office of the federal court clerk in New York between 11:30 A. M. and noon Thursday. In his papers Frohlieh does not appeal against the entire decree but centers his fire against competitive bidding and the block-booking ban. Lacks Authority Claiming that the court lacks jurisdiction to enforce these clauses, Frohlieh declares that his clients have certain rights in disposing of their property under the copyright law and that the statutory court decree written by United States Circuit Court Judge Augustus X. Hand with Federal Court Judges Henry L. Goddard and Frank Bright, violates these rights given his clients by an Act of Congress by depriving them of their property without due process of law. Xo immediate action is expected on the appeal. According to procedure the appellant files a petition for a stay on the decree with the statutory court and at the same time enters his appeal papers which are forwarded by the clerk of the New York federal court to the clerk of the Supreme Court in Washington. The problem of finding a place on the Supreme Court docket plus the time required to print either the entire record or those parts of it needed in particular for the Columbia appeal, are important factors m the fixing of a date for the hearing before the high court. In filing his papers Thursday Frohlieh is the first of the defendant's attorneys to appeal. He is also the first defendant attorney to tell the court at a hearing on motions to modify the decree that he would appeal and he has consistently taken the stand that the court lacks authority in some of the matters it has placed in the decree. Attacks Selling It may be significant that he is making no argument against any other clauses excepting those which would prevent Columbia from sell Closes Over License "This theatre is closed on account of excessive license." The above sign, placed conspicuously before the Roxy Theatre at Coulterville, 111., marks the latest round in that house's protest against the action of the Village Trustees in raising the annual license from $60 to $180 a year. The house is operated by Sparta Theatres, which are controlled by Farrar and Turner of Harrisburg. ing pictures in blocks under its own conditions. He takes no issue with admission price fixing, clearance fixing, or the prohibition of franchises as well as several other practices which the court has declared illegal. He does take issue on the right to: 1) Sell all of a season's pictures at a time in block as compared to selling each picture individually theatre by theatre; 2) To selling by a competitive bid system and to awarding the picture to the highest bidder without regard to other considerations such as old customers. And he does contest the authority of the court to make his client's lease their copyrighted articles under the decree terms. Others to Follow? The action of Columbia Wednesday did not immediately presage similar action by the other defendants. Loew's, RKO and 20th Century-Fox to date have not said whether they would appeal. United Artists, through a spokesman, declared : "We're still discussing it." Warner Bros.' Attorney Joseph Proskauer was not prepared to say whether his client would appeal. Paramount acknowledged it had the "intention" of appealing. Universal Attorney Thomas Cooke said : "We plan to appeal" and added that an appeal date had not been set. Opens Way The Columbia appeal does open the way for those exhibitor groups who wish to appear before the Supreme Court as amici curiae. (Allied has authorized such action.) It does not affect in any way the efforts of the American Theatres Association, the Southern California Theatre Owners Association and the Confederacy of Southern Associations to intervene in the case. All intervenors were denied by the statutory court and all have the right to appeal to the Supreme Court against this denial and seek to intervene in the high court, regardless of what the Government or the defendants do. ATA declared it would positively appeal on the right to intervene but that the date had not been set. From Washington reliable sources predicted that the Government appeal would be ready within three weeks and that it would be based on an attempt by the Government to get the theatre divorcement denied by the statutory court. Earlier in the week, on Monday in New York, the statutory court which issued the decree, ruled on the motions made by all eight of the defendants who sought modification of the decree clauses. Rules on Motions To the plea of all defendants that the competitive bidding clauses, or portions of them, not be enforced on July 1 as provided for in the decree, but be delayed until 90 days after the Supreme Court had entered its final rule, the statutory court said, no. The court also denied United Artists its plea that the distributor not be held responsible to prove that clearances he granted were not unreasonable, and denied Universal its plea to have franchises with independents legalized. To the appeal of the Big 5 — Paramount, 20th Century-Fox, Warner Bros., RKO, Loew's (MGM) — that they be given two years to dissolve pools with non-defendants and to cancel leases which violated decree provisions in situations where those leases were with independents, the court denied the requested time but gave the Big 5 till July 1, 1947. (On this date competitive bidding is scheduled to take effect). Denies Expansion The court also denied the Big S's request for permission to expand present theatre holding to protect their interest "and that the court modify its findings so that the Big 5 would be guilty of conspiring to "receive discriminatory license privileges" rather than "fixing minimum admission prices, run clearances and other license terms." 'Hot' Tax Issue A state sales tax still continues to be a "hot" issue in the Minnesota legislature. While Gov. Luther Youngdahl repeatedly has voiced his opposition to such a measure, Senator Karl G. Neumeier says that the likelihood that Congress will retain federal excise taxes makes it more necessary than ever that a general state sales tax be enacted now.