Polaroid Versus Fujifilm - How a Court Case Could Change Instant Photography Forever

If you’re a fan of instant film photography, a nearly decade-old legal feud between Panasonic and Fujifilm may reshape (literally) the film some instant cameras use. And those changes could potentially require an overhaul of Fujifilm’s Instax products.

Polaroid vs. Fujifilm - How Did We Get Here

The shape of Polaroid film is not only iconic, but it’s also the protected intellectual property (IP) of Polaroid. You can think of Intellectual Property. The shape of the film and the white border around it are referred to as the “classic border logo” or CBL.

A sheet of Polaroid film, shaken or not, is immediately recognizable. The white borders along the edge and a thicker border at the bottom are quintessentially Polaroid. Or is it?

In 2017, Polaroid initiated legal action against what it said were intentional similarities between Polaroid’s protected CBL and Fujifilm’s own Instax instant film.

Fujifilm did not stop production of their own square film format, and Polaroid took them to court in an attempt to stop Fujifilm from using a similarly shaped film. Polaroid even contended that the packaging for Fujifilm’s Instax lineup was designed to confuse customers.

An interesting twist in this case is that Polaroid ceased production of film in 2008, and the original Polaroid no longer exists. In 2008, the Dutch trio of Florian Kaps, André Bosman, and Marwan Saba launched the Impossible Project, purchasing more than $3 million of Polaroid equipment and taking over their headquarters in the Netherlands.

In 2017, Impossible Project’s largest shareholder acquired all of Polaroid’s original intellectual property and the entire brand. Within a year, the company reverted to the Polaroid name.

You may see where this is headed. The newly revitalized Polaroid has renewed its legal efforts against Fujifilm, and the legal battle has continued since 2017, with no conclusion in sight.

Today, Judge Naomi Reich Buchwald of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found in favor of Polaroid’s claim that the two film lines were so similar that a consumer might not be able to tell them apart.

Judge Buchwald’s order says, “given the volume and variety of this evidence, which includes customer support emails, Twitter and Instagram posts, and other online inquiries, Polaroid has sufficiently raised a genuine issue of material fact with respect to the existence of actual confusion.”

As reported by Petapixel back in 2017, Polaroid is demanding millions of dollars per year for the infringement on its IP.

And now it heads back to court.

Polaroid vs. Fujifilm - Are Consumers Really Confused?

 

I’m not a legal expert, but I am familiar with shapes and sizes, and even I can’t tell the film apart.

I created these two images from product pages and forgot which ones were which while editing in Photoshop. I had to review the original screenshots to confirm.

Additionally, Fujifilm faces challenges due to Google and Amazon displaying its products when users search for “Polaroid Film.” The Fujifilm results are sponsored, but it appears to me (again, I’m not a lawyer) that Fujifilm is at least subtly trying to appear similar to Polaroid.

So, What Happens if Polaroid Wins

In the original case, Polaroid sought royalty payments of millions of dollars per year for the infringement of its brand. Should they win and get the damages they’re seeking, this could be a staggering amount of money. Fujifilm continued to produce its film since the start of the lawsuit in 2017, and any damages would have to take into account the continued sales.

There are several possible outcomes.

The first is that either Fujifilm prevails in the court case or manages to get the case dismissed. The dismissal seems highly unlikely, as the court previously denied what is known as a summary judgment. This is a request from one of the parties for the judge to rule on dismissing the case without requiring a trial.

If Panasonic wins, it will undoubtedly be awarded damages for infringing on Polaroid’s Intellectual Property rights. How much those might be is unclear, but they’d take a dent out of Fujifilm’s Instax profits.

To avoid penalties or to continue producing Instax film in its current form, the company could consider a licensing agreement with Polaroid.

It might also be forced to stop making films that look like Polaroids. If they can’t come up with a licensing deal, an adverse ruling would certainly mean Fujifilm will have to look significantly different from Polaroid film. I’m not sure how instant films could look all that different, so it would have to be some radical change.

Could this be what Instax film has to look like in the future? 

A new film would mean new camera sales (good for Fujifilm), but also angry customers who bought Fujifilm cameras and can no longer get film (horrible for Fujifilm). It could also lead to a class action lawsuit on behalf of people who purchased Fujifilm cameras, even though the company was aware it was being sued for IP violations.

In any case, the instant camera market is poised for a shakeup of some kind. It’s hard to predict what a post-lawsuit market may look like, but it won't resemble the market for Fujifilm and Polaroid’s films as closely.

Best Instant Cameras on the Market Right Now

If you’re thinking about picking up an instant film camera, we’ve got you covered. Our buyer's guide rounds up the best instant cameras available right now — not just from Fujifilm and Polaroid, but across all major brands. Every recommendation has been hand-tested and vetted by the Imaging Resource team, so you can be sure only the top-performing models made the cut.