IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v42y2010i2p171-183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An empirical investigation of the Paramount antitrust case

Author

Listed:
  • Ricard Gil

Abstract

Production patterns in the US movie industry changed drastically between 1940 and 1960. During these decades, a major event took place: the Paramount antitrust case was resolved by the US Supreme Court in 1948. As a result, the five largest studios (MGM, Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers and RKO) were forced to vertically disintegrate and separate production and distribution from exhibition. The Supreme Court also banned these and three other studios (Columbia, Universal and United Artists) from using block booking as contractual practice. In this article, I examine how this antitrust ruling affected the movie industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricard Gil, 2010. "An empirical investigation of the Paramount antitrust case," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 171-183.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:42:y:2010:i:2:p:171-183
    DOI: 10.1080/00036840701604404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00036840701604404
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilbert, Richard & Hastings, Justine, 2001. "Vertical Integration in Gasoline Supply: An Empirical Test of Raising Rivals' Costs," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt6nf907n4, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mitsuru Sunada, 2012. "Competition among movie theaters: an empirical investigation of the Toho–Subaru antitrust case," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 36(3), pages 179-206, August.
    2. repec:hpe:journl:y:2017:v:221:i:2:p:9-31 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:42:y:2010:i:2:p:171-183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.