When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Vroegh v. Eastman Kodak Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vroegh_v._Eastman_Kodak_Co.

    The Western Digital case involved the same "binary vs decimal calculation" issue as the Vroegh v. Eastman Kodak case. In each of these cases, the named plaintiff was awarded $1000 to $2000 "for their time and effort". [9] Even though Netflix agreed to pay $2.5 million, the Judge in the case ultimately awarded Gutride Safier approximately $1.3 ...

  3. Kodak - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak

    Eastman Kodak Company was decided in Polaroid's favor in 1985, [287] and after a short period of appeals, Kodak was forced to exit the instant camera market immediately in 1986. [288] On October 12, 1990, Polaroid was awarded $909 million in damages. [ 200 ]

  4. You Press the Button, We Do the Rest - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Press_the_Button,_We...

    Only 50 were made, and did not sell well. Soon after in 1888, Eastman created a superior model, the Eastman Kodak camera to replace his poorly selling Detective. The Kodak inspired the slogan "You Press the Button, We Do the Rest." Eastman wrote the owner's manual for the Kodak, although he originally hired an advertising expert to do the job.

  5. Eastman Kodak: How a CEO Destroys an Icon - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/2012-01-20-eastman-kodak-how-a...

    Two weeks ago I introduced a new weekly series, the "CEO Gaffe of the Week." Having come across more than handful of questionable executive decisions last year when compiling my list of the Worst ...

  6. Is Eastman Kodak the Perfect Stock? - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/2011-08-19-is-eastman-kodak-the...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  7. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image...

    Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Servs., Inc., 504 U.S. 451 (1992), is a 1992 Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that even though an equipment manufacturer lacked significant market power in the primary market for its equipment—copier-duplicators and other imaging equipment—nonetheless, it could have sufficient market power in the secondary aftermarket for repair parts to ...

  8. Wolk v. Kodak Imaging Network, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolk_v._Kodak_Imaging...

    In her motion for summary judgment against Kodak, Wolk argued that Kodak directly infringed her copyrights by copying her images and printing them on products for its customers. [2]: 740–41 She argued that she was entitled to statutory damages of up to $150,000 for each instance of infringement because Kodak "wilfully infringed" her copyrights.

  9. Qualex - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualex

    Qualex Inc. was the largest wholesale and on-site photographic processing company in the world. It was formed in March 1988 as a joint venture between Eastman Kodak and Fuqua Industries, but became a wholly owned subsidiary of Kodak in 1994. [1] It was headquartered in Durham, North Carolina. Qualex operated a large network of commercial and in ...