Epstein Secrets

duction of high quality films, NITE's board of directors, in April 1977, created a "Film Fund," to which its members could make donations, and gave Patterson the job of soliciting their contributions. He, in r 41 turn, devised the following plan. NITE's member theatres would show several minutes of on-sc

ertising, for the sale of advertising space on NITE's members' movie screens. The contract provided that at least fifty percent of the net revenues Cinemavision collected from its advertisers for the participating theatres would ['.5] be paid directly to the Film Fund. The contract required NITE to use its

arate itself from SAFFCO and NITE in order to save its business. These efforts came too late, and in 1978 Cinemavision went out of business. NITE, Patterson, and SAFFCO, invoking section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15 (1982), brought this private anti-trust action against the eight defendant film d

ies, numerous theatre exhibitors withdrew from the NITE program; they could not afford to lose their principal sources of supply. At the same time, Cinemavision tried to separate itself from SAFFCO and NITE in order to save its business. These efforts came too late, and in 1978 Cinemavision went out of busi

duction of high quality films, NITE's board of directors, in April 1977, created a "Film Fund," to which its members could make donations, and gave Patterson the job of soliciting their contributions. He, in ['* 4] turn, devised the following plan. NITE's member theatres would show several minutes of on-

ertising, for the sale of advertising space on NITE's members' movie screens. The contract provided that at least fifty percent of the net revenues Cinemavision collected from its advertisers for the participating theatres would ["5] be paid directly to the Film Fund. The contract required NITE to use its b