1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to an article identifying process. More particularly, it relates to such a process which is immune to counterfeiting. It further relates to such a process which will allow the path of genuine articles with which the process is used to be traced in distribution channels of commerce.
2. Description of the Prior Art
A variety of techniques are known in the prior art for identifying articles in an effort to reduce counterfeiting of them. The use of trademarks, special labels, serial numbers and similar practices is well known. However, such techniques are often subject to counterfeiting, particularly in the case of articles for which demand exceeds supply. Such a supply and demand imbalance may be the result of ordinary market conditions, such as in the case of integrated circuits. The imbalance may also be artificially produced by the manufacturer of the articles, such as in the case of designer label wearing apparel, in order to allow higher profit margins. In either event, there is substantial incentive for counterfeiters to take advantage of the supply and demand imbalance. A related problem is the theft and subsequent distribution of genuine articles for which the demand exceeds the supply. Similar considerations apply in the case of credit cards and identification cards.
A further approach which is often employed in an effort to reduce such counterfeiting is to apply certain fluorescent or phosphorescent materials to the articles, either in a predetermined pattern, or simply by impregnating the article or a portion of the article with the fluorescent or phosphorescent materials. Such materials are not ordinarily visible, but if, for example, an ultraviolet light is shined on them, they exhibit their fluorescence or phosphorescence. Such materials may be either organic or inorganic compounds or compositions, with organic phosphorescence (when present) being very short-lived. The use of inorganic fluorescent or phosphorescent materials is preferred because these materials are harder for counterfeiters to duplicate. Organic fluorescent or phosphorescent materials are usually more easily synthesized by a typical counterfeiter of limited resources and technical sophistication.
However, only limited success has been attained in this regard, even with the use of more difficult to obtain inorganic fluorescent and phosphorescent materials.
While both organic and inorganic materials and capable of having their fluorescence or phosphorescence modified in spectral wavelength, intensity and time behavior, greater variation of emission behavior is possible with the inorganic materials. Organic material fluorescence and phosphorescence occur as a result of molecular bonds, especially pi bonds, being activated by excitation to storage of energy followed by emission. No long term, time-lag, storage based emission is possible at room temperature since the organic material cannot interact sufficiently with crystal lattice elements (or other proximal rigid structures) in the vicinity of its molecular bonds to produce a storage capacity. For this reason, time-dependent, storage based emission behavior of organic materials does not extend beyond mere minute fractions of a second duration.
In contrast, inorganic material fluorescence and phosphorescence occur as a result of molecular orbital electron interaction with the surrounding lattice elements to produce time-dependent, storage based emission behavior lasting, in some instances, even indefinitely.
The ready availability or ease of manufacture of organic materials has been matched by analogous ready availability or ease of manufacture of many inorganic phosphor materials. Since these organic and inorganic materials can be procured or manufactured, and used to mimic the behavior of state-of-the-art compositions in prior art identification techniques, counterfeiting has continued. Only when difficult to procure or manufacture proprietary compositions are used, whose complex stimulated behavior is as described herein as sequential process or step testing for excitation, storage and emission behavior, and which cannot be mimicked by off-the-shelf compositions, will counterfeiting stop.
To devise a counterfeit-proof identification process, it is also instructive to consider previous sucesses with paper substrate objects, such as currency and checks. The integrity of currency is protected by the presence of images that defy counterfeiting. The U.S. Treasury Department produces currency using expensive printing presses, high technology, such as engraved plates, special papers, and special formulation inks. A controlled source of supply is maintained both for the ink and the paper. The currency example shows that a successful counterfeit resistant system has control points in manufacture, through equipment, technology and supplies that are beyond the financial and technical resources of the counterfeiter.
Transference of the currency approach to non-paper-based objects has generally failed. Extraordinary unit costs of production and the nature of the finely detailed images to be printed prohibit the assembly line manufacture of non-paper-based objects with a counterfeit resistant image comparable to that employed with currency.
It is further recognized that an article identifying process must meet the rigorous standards of forensic science if it is to be useful in practice. What is sought, as an additional result of this invention, is to mesh civilian and police investigations of authenticity with the goal of providing a forensically viable identification method acceptable to prosecution, preferably interchangeably, in both civil and criminal courts. An important consideration is therefore that the process must give a clear, unambiguous result. An ideal process further must involve a simple test procedure that persons without scientific training, such as store clerks, security guards and police, can administer without getting either false positive or false negative results. Only such tests will be usable on a widespread basis outside a laboratory setting and still be accepted for evidentiary purposes in criminal and other legal proceedings.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds