Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-08-16
MONOPOLY is ALLEGED
Said to Be able to Regulate Mum.
Der of Theaters.
THOROUGH INQUIRY MADE
Defendants, It Is Alleged, Control
More Than Seventy Per
Cent of Business.

today for the dissolution Of the Motor
Picture Patents Company and the Gen
eral Film Company. Ten prominent
moving picture film concerns are accused
of combining to monopolize the business
even to the extent Of increasing or de
creasng the number of motion picture
theaters. in which they have no pro-
prietary interest.
The following corporations and indii-
viduals. who are officers or directors, are
named defendants:
Motion Picture Patents Company. Cen
eral Film Company. Biograph Company,
Thomas A. Edison Uncorporated). Es-
sanay Film Manufacturing Company. The
Kalem Company Uncorporated). George
Kleine, Lubin Manufacturing Company,
Melies Manufacturing Company. Pathe
Freres. The Sel:g Polyscope Company,
The Vitagraph Company of America. Ar
mat Moving Picture Company. Frank l..
Dyer, Henry \. Marvin, j. j. Kennedy.
William Pelzer, Samuel Ong, j. A. Berst.
Seigmund Lubin, CASTOR Melies. Albert
+. Smith, George x. Spoor and w. n.
Selig.
Each of the defendants is alleged to
have overstepped the lawful monopoly
granted by their patents. and the petition
asks that several complicated interlocklng
license restrictions. tying patents TO-
gether. be ordered Cancelled.
The government charges that unreason.
able and oppressive restraints and condi-
tionS have been arbitrarily imposed or
the manufacture and leasing Of films and
machines, deriving the public OF the ad
vantages OF competition, especially the
competition OF foreign films, the i'm
portation Of which is alleged to be re-
stricted.
Signed by Wickersham.
| Edwin p. Grosvenor, special assistant
to the Attorney General, who has charg'
| of the pending antitrust suit against th'
| International Harvester Company. made
I an exhaustive investigation of the NOV
| ing picture business, drawing the Pc
| tition filed today by United States AT
| torney John c. Swartley. In addition, th
bill is signed by Attorney General Wick
ersham and James A. Fowler. his as
| Sistant.
| The government petition says betweel
9. 100000 and 3OO0.O0 feet Of pictures ar
printed each week by manufacturers an
distributed to thousands Of exhibitor
| all over the United States. The govern
ment declares that a sum greatly in ex
cess of $1OO.O00,0O0 has been invested Il
| the different branches Of the business.
| The defendants control. 1t is added. fron
| 20 to so per cent of the film business
| furnishing approximately 1000 exhibitors
| The Motion Picture Patents Company
| organized in New Jersey in September
1908. is the holding company of all tn
Other than collecting and distributing
royalties among the defendants. the bil
says. the patents companys only bust
ness is the bringing of lawsuits under tn
patents it holds. Hundreds of suits hav
| been brought, it is added. Ito harass an,
oppress all persons engaged in the mot ol
picture business who have not obeyed it
mandates
Organized in Maine.
The General Film Company. organizes
| in Maine in April 1910. alleged to be til
| agency through which the defendants
| films are distributed to exhibitors through
| out the country. was formed. the petition
AYERS. to monopolize the business of tn
rental exchanges which previously dis
| tributedi the films.
This company, it is declared. has &C
quired the business or Cancelled tn
licenses. held from the Motion Pictur'
Patents Company. of every rental ex
change in the United States with one ex
$794, 500 in preferred stock.
| The alleged unlawful combination o
| the defendants became effective Januar.
| 1, 1909. according to the petition. A
| that time the power Of the monopoly o
| the defendants was absolute, it is stated
as they were the only manufacturers o
Importers of motion pictures in tn
Acountry. Not one of the thousand
|
States, it is charged, can Obtain
| a motion picture manufactured by am
| one of the ten defendant manufacturer
unless he has received a license from tn
patents company which obligates him {,
/ use the films Of the alleged combination
exclusively.
An exhibitor has to pay 81 a week {,
the Patents Company, it is said. on ever,
exhibiting machine owned by him. evel
| including machines sold years before {,
| the exhibitor without any conditions bein,
| attached to the sale.
Defendants, through the Patents Com
pany," the petition adds. were enabled
| to, and did. determine whether new mo
| ton picture theaters should should no
| be opened. and whether old ones shoult
be closed. although defendants had NJ
proprietary interest in such theatcrs
| This power they have exercised and con
tinue to exercise arbitrarily and unrea
sonably through the Patents Company"
| Each of the ten film manufacturing de
| PENDANTS has a license agreement will
the Patents Company, providing tina
| films shall not fall into the han1s of ex
| hibitors who use any but the defendant.
exhibiting or projecting machines.
The Patents Company agreed will
| manufacturers of exhibiting machines
stipulating that every machine should b,
sold subject to the condition that il shai
be used only for the films OF the alleged
combination. These agreements, it I.
said, fixed the selling price of machines.