The Washington times., 1938-07-20


field.
After more than a years inveS
tigation, the Justice Department
brought antitrust charges against
the eight leading film corpora
tions. Is of their subsidiary or as
eociated corporations and 1872 in
dividuals, officers and directors OF
the defendants.
CONTRACTS HIT
In a petition in equity, the Gov
ernment asked the court enjoin
perpetually members of the indus,
try from continuing monopolistic
practices and declare illegal all
contracts and agreements consid
cred to be operating in restraint
Of trade.
The government said its first
object is to force separation of
production and exhibitor interests
within the industry in order that
all movie theaterS shall be free
from the domination and control
Of any producer"
COMPANIES ACCUSED
Among the defendant companies
named were Paramount Pictures,
Inc; Loew'S Incorporated: Irving
Trust Company of New York, as
trustee in bankruptcy for Radio
Keith Orpheum Corporation; War
ner Bros. Pictures, Inc; Twen-
tieth Century Fox Film Corpora
ton; Columbia Pictures Corpora
ton; Universal Corporation and
United Artists Corporation.
Among the well-known motion
picture executives named in the
petition we're Sam Goldwyn,
United Artists; Charles R. Rogers,
Universal; Harry Cohn, Jack
Cohn and Charles B. Mintz, Co
lumbia; Joseph M. Schenck, Dar-
ryl F. zanuck, Sidney r. Kent.
William Goetz and Truman Tai
ley, Twentieth Century Fox.
OTHER EXECUTIVES
Also Harry M. Warner, Albert
Warner and Jack L. Warner, War
ner Brothers; David Sarnoff and
Merlin H. Aylesworth, R-K-O;
Nicholas M. Schenck, Arthur M.
Loew, and Louis B. Mayer, of
M-G-W; Barney Balaban, Adolph
Zukor and John D. Hertz, Para
mount.
Mary Pickford, Douglas Fair
banks and Charles Chaplin also
were made defendants as mem
bers Of United Artists.
In a public statement accom-
panying the petition, the Justice
Department cited seven major eco
nomic abuses resulting from al
monopoly in the film industry.
ABUSES CITED
Summarized, these were:
l. Independently-o wned thea
ters are being driven out of busi-
ness.
2. New competitors who seek to
enter the movie-exhibtion field
find it almost impossible to obtain
films ''on any reasonable basis"
3. Those independently-owned
theaters that are still operating
have very little freedom in selec-
tion of films and in the manage
ment of their business.
4. Independent picture pro
ducers find it practically impossi-
BILE to find satisfactory outlet for
their products.
5. New capital investment in
the motion picture business is dis
couraged because of great diff
Guilty in competing with the major
concerns;
b. Inc moVle-golng pQbIlc Is not
permitted to exercise choice as to
the type of pictures it desires to
see. and,
7. There is no opportunity for
new forms of artistic expression
which are not approved by those
controlling the major companies.
MAY GO TO CONGRESS
The department reported it is
taking civil action rather than
criminal proceedings because it be-
lieves only injunctive action can
remedy the situation complained
of.
1t was noted the industry already
had attempted to make some ad,
justment Of complaints.
Victory for the Government may
fall short of bringing about the OBJ.
jectiveS sought, according to the
department. II this situation
should arise, the department in,
tends to place the matter before
Congress.