Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
history of film industry
the history of motion picture
history of film industry
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: history of film industry
The United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. (1947) case deals with monopolies and antitrust laws. I chose the trusts/monopolies topic due to my interest in finance and economics. Since elementary school, I have been fascinated by John D. Rockefeller’s story about his oil monopoly. This history has caused me to be interested in monopolies and trusts. I began enjoy reading about the elite who obtained their wealth illegally. After reading and watching The Great Gatsby and watching the movie Catch Me If You Can, I have been fascinated with counterfeit wealth and how people may have gotten away with breaking the law. My favorite thing about APUSH is learning how the economy has changed over time and how that has affected the lifestyle of the people and the power of the government. This Paramount case deals with government regulation of business and how it implements the notion of free competition by attacking monopolies.
I am interested in how corporate and finance laws are implemented and how much government is involved in business. This case involves with monopolies in the motion pictures industry. As learned in APUSH, the motion pictures industry was extremely popular during the twentieth century and there was a lot of news surrounding that area of American life. I had originally had chosen the court case Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), which also had to do with monopolies, but there wasn’t any antitrust laws during that time period to research. That was the first time monopolies were challenged in court. Over a hundred years later, the monopoly of the movie production industry was challenged through the same idea of antitrust. The topic of monopolies and trusts even plays an important role in society today as it shapes government regul...
... middle of paper ...
...ducers file for Supreme Court amicus curiae. Retrieved , from http://www.cobbles.com/simpp_archive/paramountcase_5amicus1947.htm
Hodak, G. (2012). May 3, 1948: Court Rules on Hollywood Antitrust Case. ABA Journal, 98(5), 1.
The Consent Decree of 1940 - The Paramount Case. (n.d.). The Consent Decree of 1940 - The Paramount Case. Retrieved , from http://www.cobbles.com/simpp_archive/paramountcase_3consent1940.htm
The Hollywood Studios in Federal Court - The Paramount case. (n.d.). The Hollywood Studios in Federal Court - The Paramount case. Retrieved , from http://www.cobbles.com/simpp_archive/paramountcase_4equity1945.htm
The Supreme Court verdict that brought an end to the Hollywood studio system. (n.d.).The Supreme Court verdict that brought an end to the Hollywood studio system. Retrieved , from http://www.cobbles.com/simpp_archive/paramountcase_6supreme1948.htm
II. Trial Court Ruling. The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim. The plaintiff’s retaliation claim went to trial, but the court excluded evidence regarding the alleged sexual harassment. The court refused to grant the plaintiff a new trial. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s ruling.
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
"FindLaw | Cases and Codes." FindLaw | Cases and Codes. FINDLAW, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014
Linder, Douglas O. "Judge James E. Horton." UMKC School of Law. 1999. Web. 24 Feb. 2011.
The idea of Hollywood, before it was Hollywood as we know it seems foreign. However, it did exist and was known as "Pre-code." Pre-code Hollywood refers to the era in the American film industry between the introduction of sound in the late 1920's and the enforcement of the Hays Code censorship guidelines, which went into effect on June 13, 1934 (Association of Motion Picture Producers 1934). Durin...
Beginning the mid 1920s, Hollywood’s ostensibly all-powerful film studios controlled the American film industry, creating a period of film history now recognized as “Classical Hollywood”. Distinguished by a practical, workmanlike, “invisible” method of filmmaking- whose purpose was to demand as little attention to the camera as possible, Classical Hollywood cinema supported undeviating storylines (with the occasional flashback being an exception), an observance of a the three act structure, frontality, and visibly identified goals for the “hero” to work toward and well-defined conflict/story resolution, most commonly illustrated with the employment of the “happy ending”. Studios understood precisely what an audience desired, and accommodated their wants and needs, resulting in films that were generally all the same, starring similar (sometimes the same) actors, crafted in a similar manner. It became the principal style throughout the western world against which all other styles were judged. While there have been some deviations and experiments with the format in the past 50 plus ye...
"Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court." Background Summary & Questions (•••). N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.
"UNITED STATES v. JONES." The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 18 Nov. 2013 .
Supreme Court of the United States, (2000). United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc Washington, DC: Retrieved from http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/98-1682.html
In Hollywood political conflict was also paving the way for what would later occur in Hollywood as the HUAC would attack the industry. Big business controlled the lucrative industry and the companies that controlled the market were eight major studios in Hollywood. The Metro-Goldw...
Brannen Jr., Daniel E., Richard Clay Hare and Rebeca E. Valentine, Supreme Court Drama: Cases that Changed America. 2 ed. Detroit: V-X-L, 2011, Print,
Schatz, Thomas. Hollywood Genres: Formulas, Filmmaking, and the Studio System. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1981.
United States of America. U.S. Supreme Court. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, 1 Apr. 2003. 13 Nov. 2013
Sheffet, Mary Jane. "The Supreme Court And Predatory Pricing." Journal Of Public Policy & Marketing 13.1 (1994): 163-167. Business Source Complete. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. (2014, May 3). MGM Studios v. Grokster. Retrieved from http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_04_480