Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies	Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies Litigation We are the subject of various pending or threatened legal actions in the ordinary course of our business. All such matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes that are not predictable with assurance. Additionally, our businesses are subject to allegations of patent infringement by our competitors as well as by non-practicing entities (NPEs), sometimes referred to as “patent trolls,” who may seek monetary settlements from us, our competitors, suppliers and resellers. Consequently, as of March 31, 2013, we are unable to reasonably estimate the ultimate aggregate amount of any monetary liability or financial impact that we may incur with respect to these matters. It is reasonably possible that the ultimate resolution of these matters could materially affect our operating results. Copyright Levies In many European Union (EU) member countries, the sale of recordable optical media is subject to a private copyright levy. The levies are intended to compensate copyright holders with "fair compensation" for the harm caused by private copies made by natural persons of protected works under the European Copyright Directive, which became effective in 2002 (Directive). Levies are generally charged directly to the importer of the product upon the sale of the products. Payers of levies remit levy payments to collecting societies which, in turn, are intended to distribute funds to copyright holders. Levy systems of EU member countries must comply with the Directive, but individual member countries are responsible for administering their own systems. Since implementation, the levy systems have been the subject of numerous litigation and law making activities. On October 21, 2010, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that fair compensation is an autonomous European law concept that was introduced by the Directive and must be uniformly applied in all EU member states. The ECJ stated that fair compensation must be calculated based on the harm caused to the authors of protected works by private copying. The ECJ also stated that the indiscriminate application of the private copying levy to devices not made available to private users and clearly reserved for uses other than private copying is incompatible with the Directive. The ECJ ruling made clear that copyright holders are only entitled to fair compensation payments (funded by importers of levy payments made by importers of applicable products, including the Company) when sales of optical media are made to natural persons intending to make private copies. Since the Directive was implemented in 2002, we have paid in excess of $100 million in levies to various ongoing collecting societies related to commercial channel sales. Based on the ECJ's October 2010 ruling and subsequent litigation and law making activities, we believe that these payments were not consistent with the Directive and should not have been paid to the various collecting societies. Accordingly, in 2010 we began withholding levy payments to the various collecting societies on commercial and consumer channel sales. We released accruals for levy payments related to commercial channel sales in 2011. However, we continue to accrue a liability for levies arising from consumer channel sales. As of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, we are carrying a liability of $29.1 million and $27.7 million, respectively, associated with levies related to consumer channel sales for which we are withholding payment. At March 31, 2013, the recovery of some or all of the approximately $100 million of copyright levies previously paid on professional and commercial sales represents a gain contingency that has not yet met the required criteria for recognition in our financial statements. There is no assurance that we will realize any of this gain contingency. Since the October 2010 ECJ ruling, we evaluate quarterly on a country-by-country basis whether: (i) levies should be accrued on current period commercial and/or consumer channel sales; and, (ii) accrued, but unpaid, copyright levies on prior period consumer product sales should be reversed. Our evaluation is made on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis and considers ongoing and cumulative developments related to levy litigation and law making activities within each jurisdiction as well as throughout the EU. If we determine a levy obligation is remote, then, in the period of such determination we discontinue accruing current period levies and reverse previously accrued but unpaid amounts by reducing cost of goods sold in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, we did not reverse any amounts into cost of goods sold for prior period obligations. We are subject to several pending or threatened legal actions by the individual European national levy collecting societies in relation to private copyright levies under the Directive. Those actions generally seek payment of the commercial and consumer optical levies withheld by Imation. Imation has corresponding claims in those actions seeking reimbursement of levies improperly collected by those collecting societies. Although these actions are subject to the uncertainties inherent in the litigation process, based on the information presently available to us, management does not expect that the ultimate resolution of these actions will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. We anticipate that court decisions may be rendered in 2013 that may directly or indirectly impact our levy exposure in specific European countries which could trigger a review of our levy exposure in those countries.

Litigation, Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

We are the subject of various pending or threatened legal actions in the ordinary course of our business. All such matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes that are not predictable with assurance. Additionally, our businesses are subject to allegations of patent infringement by our competitors as well as by non-practicing entities (NPEs), sometimes referred to as “patent trolls,” who may seek monetary settlements from us, our competitors, suppliers and resellers. Consequently, as of March 31, 2013, we are unable to reasonably estimate the ultimate aggregate amount of any monetary liability or financial impact that we may incur with respect to these matters. It is reasonably possible that the ultimate resolution of these matters could materially affect our operating results.

In many European Union (EU) member countries, the sale of recordable optical media is subject to a private copyright levy. The levies are intended to compensate copyright holders with "fair compensation" for the harm caused by private copies made by natural persons of protected works under the European Copyright Directive, which became effective in 2002 (Directive). Levies are generally charged directly to the importer of the product upon the sale of the products. Payers of levies remit levy payments to collecting societies which, in turn, are intended to distribute funds to copyright holders. Levy systems of EU member countries must comply with the Directive, but individual member countries are responsible for administering their own systems. Since implementation, the levy systems have been the subject of numerous litigation and law making activities. On October 21, 2010, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that fair compensation is an autonomous European law concept that was introduced by the Directive and must be uniformly applied in all EU member states. The ECJ stated that fair compensation must be calculated based on the harm caused to the authors of protected works by private copying. The ECJ also stated that the indiscriminate application of the private copying levy to devices not made available to private users and clearly reserved for uses other than private copying is incompatible with the Directive. The ECJ ruling made clear that copyright holders are only entitled to fair compensation payments (funded by importers of levy payments made by importers of applicable products, including the Company) when sales of optical media are made to natural persons intending to make private copies.

Since the Directive was implemented in 2002, we have paid in excess of $100 million in levies to various ongoing collecting societies related to commercial channel sales. Based on the ECJ's October 2010 ruling and subsequent litigation and law making activities, we believe that these payments were not consistent with the Directive and should not have been paid to the various collecting societies. Accordingly, in 2010 we began withholding levy payments to the various collecting societies on commercial and consumer channel sales. We released accruals for levy payments related to commercial channel sales in 2011. However, we continue to accrue a liability for levies arising from consumer channel sales. As of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, we are carrying a liability of $29.1 million and $27.7 million, respectively, associated with levies related to consumer channel sales for which we are withholding payment. At March 31, 2013, the recovery of some or all of the approximately $100 million of copyright levies previously paid on professional and commercial sales represents a gain contingency that has not yet met the required criteria for recognition in our financial statements. There is no assurance that we will realize any of this gain contingency.

Since the October 2010 ECJ ruling, we evaluate quarterly on a country-by-country basis whether: (i) levies should be accrued on current period commercial and/or consumer channel sales; and, (ii) accrued, but unpaid, copyright levies on prior period consumer product sales should be reversed. Our evaluation is made on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis and considers ongoing and cumulative developments related to levy litigation and law making activities within each jurisdiction as well as throughout the EU. If we determine a levy obligation is remote, then, in the period of such determination we discontinue accruing current period levies and reverse previously accrued but unpaid amounts by reducing cost of goods sold in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, we did not reverse any amounts into cost of goods sold for prior period obligations.

We are subject to several pending or threatened legal actions by the individual European national levy collecting societies in relation to private copyright levies under the Directive. Those actions generally seek payment of the commercial and consumer optical levies withheld by Imation. Imation has corresponding claims in those actions seeking reimbursement of levies improperly collected by those collecting societies. Although these actions are subject to the uncertainties inherent in the litigation process, based on the information presently available to us, management does not expect that the ultimate resolution of these actions will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. We anticipate that court decisions may be rendered in 2013 that may directly or indirectly impact our levy exposure in specific European countries which could trigger a review of our levy exposure in those countries.