To prohibit and to prevent the trade practices known as "compulsory block-booking" and "blind selling" of motion-picture films in interstate and foreign commerce (1939)

2 TRADE PRACTICES IN MOTION-PICTURE INDUSTRY tures for the ensuing year in large blocks — often the entire output — thus affording the exhibitors no choice but to take all of the pictures so offered, or none. Blind selling is the trade practice, of the Big Eight, whereby pictures are leased to the exhibitors usually before they have been produced and with little or no information concerning the character or quality of the pictures that will be delivered, the stories that will be embodied therein, or the treatment that will be accorded the story material in the filming thereof.3 The exhibitors constitute the only logical and readily available points of contact between the motion-picture industry arid the various communities throughout the country. This is particularly true and especially important in the residential sections of the cities and in the rural districts. The theaters in such areas are generally operated by independent exhibitors, who cater to the family trade, including practically all of the juvenile and adolescent movie-goers, as distinguished from the big-city downtown theaters, the majority of which are owned, controlled, or operated by members of the Big Eight, and cater to more sophisticated audiences. The representatives of religious, educational, and welfare organizations and groups, protesting against undesirable pictures exhibited in the local theaters, find that because of compulsory block booking and blind selling the exhibitor is not a free agent in the selection of films, that he must buy blindly and in blocks, and that his refusal to exhibit even the most objectionable picture included in a leased block causes him financial loss which he can seldom afford to bear. These representatives also find that the exhibitor is helpless in the matter of obtaining man}7 outstanding pictures not included in the blocks under contract for the reason that three or four blocks of pictures will virtually preempt his playing time and he cannot obtain the meritorious pictures of other distributors without buying their entire blocks which, in the circumstances, he cannot possibly use. To the foregoing evil effects of compulsory block booking and blind selling should be added the injury to the independent producer whose pictures are not distributed by the Big Eight, and who finds the playing time on the screens so monopolized by his stronger rivals that he can only obtain occasional spot bookings for his output and consequently has little or no incentive to increase either the number or quality of his productions. The extent to which the motion-picture business has already been monopolized by the Big Eight is fully set forth in the verified complaint in the case of United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc., et al., filed in the Federal court on July 20, 1938. This is a suit under the Sherman antitrust law which seeks mainly to compel the major producer-distributors to divest themselves of their theater holdings. The complaint summarizes the situation as follows: (222) In securing control of the motion-picture theaters of the United States, particularly the first-run metropolitan theaters, and the larger and better chains of theaters, coupled with production facilities, the defendant producer-exhibitors herein have effectually monopolized the market for motion pictures upon a Nation-wide scale and have drawn unto themselves the power of effectually excluding from that market both independent producers and independent exhibitors. 3 Compulsory block booking may be briefly described as "full line forcing;" blind selling as requiring the exhibitors to "buy a pig in a poke." LIBRAR/ Of CONGRESS JUN2 31S39 ntVlftlON OF DOCUMENTS