Well, I imagine I don't have enough time to devote sufficient study to the matter...
It seems I have mixed opinions on the goodness of such controls... I don't think I can come to good personal POV soon, so I will just leave it on the shelf for now.
On one hand
why not allow the creators do what they want with their own creations?
Competition can come from unique and different methods
rather than similar but different ones.
And, besides, no one said they can't try....
In some ways its like telling a sports man he is too good to compete in a competition because it would be unfair to others less well gifted, or physically / mentally prepared...
What was the law suit about?
Who vs Who?
So those Film Mailers were Kodak's way at getting around the decree?
I remember visiting Germany in early the late 70's or early 80's and Perutz Film and possibly Agfa as well (sold at Hertie...) was mostly (or all?) processing included...
why was that?
Kodak was allowed to compete in the processing market but not to use its dominant position in the film market to control the processing market. Its control of the processing market also put competitors in the film market at a disadvantage because of its proprietary processes. It's not illegal to have a monopoly or near monopoly in itself. What is illegal is a practice which in conjunction with marketplace dominance has the effect of stifling competition. Lack of competition is seen as inhibiting innovation and alternatives, and as giving the dominant company the ability to charge whatever it wants due to a lack of alternatives.
Only Kodak was prohibited from bundling processing. Other companies could and did in the USA, and Kodak could anywhere else. At one time I bought both Fujichrome and Agfachrome with processing included.
Kodak Mailers offered a way to get processing done when there was no place to drop it off, like when you live in the boonies, and also to get it processed when traveling, when it obviously can't be dropped off someplace and picked up days later. I used Kodachrome mailers frequently as I could buy them much cheaper (anyone in SoCal remember Fedco?) than dropping off Kodachrome at my local photo store for Kodak processing.
I used to see the lack of bundled processing as a minor annoyance, until Kodak's processing went to hell for a while in the late 70's (long before the Qualex fiasco). After too many scratches, pinholes, off color and dust, I stopped using my beloved Kodachrome for a while. Eventually another company was recommended to me for K-14, and they did excellent work, so I was back in business with K25 and K64. Without competitive K-14 processing Kodak would not have sold me any more Kodachrome until I knew I could trust them again.
In the interim I shot Ektachrome 64 (cold and grainy), Fujichrome 100 (gaudy and grainy), and Agfachrome 64 (really nice color, well balanced, rather like Kodachrome with creamy whites, and grainy.) At that time, nothing measured up to the K-14 films overall. And only Agfachrome has resisted fading as well as the Kodachromes.
Originally Posted by Ray Rogers
United States V. Kodak (1954) established the consent decree
US v. Eastman Kodak Co., 63 F.3d 95 (2nd Cir. 1994) repealed the consent decree.
In this reference, you see both cases referred to which controlled sale of film to customers and film with processing to customers (among other complaints). Left out are the minor law suits that ensued which I referred to above by Berkey, Pavelle and GAF and then later by Polaroid.
Originally Posted by nickrapak
These suits hurt no one but the customers, especially in the latter 4 cases. Repealing the consent decree has come quite too late to save analog photography, as without this decree, the Qualex fiasco referred to probably would never have happened, and today's processes would have been a lot better than they are. These cases hindered R&D and thus innovation.
I could give some specific examples but why bother.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
But the government was doing "what was in our best interest!" :rolleyes:
Yes, agreed. I even found pages on their server you cannot access by following their registry.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
I just found out that on their german section they list professional films within their shop. I guess this is something new.
Well, on second sight I realize they offer only type 135. For someone looking for type 120 , entering their webshop and following their "Professional Film" link that will be a dead end street...
Last edited by AgX; 06-18-2010 at 04:35 AM. Click to view previous post history.