Kodak’s Insane Copyright Policies

If you were hired for a photo job, and the client asked you to sign a contract to turn over all of your rights, destroy your digital negatives, and then you were told to never even admit you took the photo if you saw it out in the wild, you'd probably laugh in their face and leave and wonder what the hell you were supposed to be photographing in the first place, so why have 4000 photographers agreed to this?

Hi everyone, Azriel Knight here, and today I'm talking about one of Kodak's latest ventures. Is it KODAKIT or is it KODAK-IT? Look, can we just stop with naming everything Koda-something, please? Anyway, KODAKIT connects photographers with clients in an Uber-like format. It was launched in 2017, and on the surface, it sounds like a great idea, almost immediately, though, after launch, PetaPixel writes an article claiming the app is low balling photographers and after reading it, I tend to agree. Look, we've all taken lower pay, but there's usually a good reason: it's a good cause, it's a passion project, or you're just starting out in a new field. Usually the currency is the resulting photos. The ability to say "hey, look at this cool picture, I took it" unfortunately, KODAKIT takes all of that away. On February 22, 2019, PDNPulse writer David Walker blasted out this article outlining how KODAKIT owns all of your photos you legally have to delete them including, outtakes. You cannot use them for your portfolio without prior written permission, and you can't even point at a billboard and say "hey, I took that, neat." The general council of the National Press Photographer's association says in the article "I can't imagine who at Kodak thought this would be a good idea, but it is extremely disappoiting that a company whose company name was once synonymous with photography would promote a program that strips photographers of copyright and so unilaterally favours the client that it resembles a contract of adhesion." You could defend them and say "this isn't really Kodak, it's a subsidiary", but they thought enough to attach their name to it and make it part of their brand, stupid name and all. As a long-time Kodak fanboy, the more I learn about the company, the more disappointed I am. Kodak initially democratized photography with roll film 100 years ago, but decades since have shown that the evolution of photography is not in their best interest from proprietary formats like the 620 spools tat would only fit their cameras, to the suppression of the digital sensor. Kodak is up to their neck in quicksand and every time someone reaches out with a branch, they insist on using their own stick. As a huge fan of their products, I have to say I'm really torn, I guess we'll see how I feel when my current supply runs out.

Thank you all for watching, I hope you enjoyed this and you got something out it. I will leave all my sources in the description below. What is the stupidest Kodak-like name that you can come up with. Let me know in the comments, and until next time, stay classic!


Subtitles by Tim Peters (Gemista)