Forever Marking: Synthetic Gem-Quality Diamonds

By Chaim Even-Zohar

When De Beers recently announced its Forevermark as a worldwide brand for quality diamonds, the market very quickly grasped that this would enable a clear differentiation between natural and synthetic diamonds. Moreover, it would facilitate the launch of a De Beers synthetic gem-quality brand in due course, without necessarily adversely impacting the clearly identifiable natural product. This is of course conjecture, because De Beers keeps utterly silent about its gem synthetics strategies, its pricing or marketing policies and other plans regarding these high-tech diamonds.

In plain English, De Beers elaborates on its meaning of a “mark of origin” or “fingerprint” and then the company goes quite a few steps further. In the 70-page patent document, De Beers actually outlines the possible applications – and options – for synthetic gem-quality marketing. It essentially provides a range of marketing tools for those who are planning De Beers’ entry into the synthetic diamond jewelry market.

Might future Element Six synthetic Sightholders get boxes of goods that already have their corporate logos inside? Would Element Six be able to check on jewelers and whether they are also selling synthetics made by non-Element Six Sightholders? Would Element Six market its gem diamonds as “being the closest to the real thing?” What will Element Six do with technology that will clearly differentiate between one CVD synthetic and another? Will use of the mark require Element Six to polish the diamonds itself or will the mark “survive” the normal polishing process? The possibilities are mind-boggling! Borrowing from Supplier of Choice terminology, this patent’s benefits would be clearly viewed as “value-adding components.” The specific features, which De Beers identifies, will provide, it says in the patent description, one or more of the following benefits:

• Enable the specific manufacturer of the CVD synthetic gemstone to be identified, either by the manufacturer or by the marketplace.
• Provide a means by which to generate a distinctive mark such as a trademark.
• Enhance the identification of the synthetic nature of the diamond material.
• Provide a means by which modification of the CVD synthetic diamond material may be identified, such modification including changes to physical shape and annealing treatments such as those which modify color.

Wow! Any recutting or color change treatment of the “Near-Forevermark” would be detectable. The movement of the stone through the diamond jewelry value chain could be monitored. Basically, this is all good news, actually excellent news, but it begs the questions: When? Where? At what cost? And at what scope? Or, as some seem to believe, is De Beers working on building up a massive synthetic gem-quality stockpile? A synthetic Big Bang at Wal-

Mart prices?

Revealing its Future Plans 

What is known in the market – and for which De Beers is highly praised – are the company’s efforts to develop sophisticated synthetic detection methods so that any jeweler can purchase an affordable machine to identify the synthetic product. But this is a little bit like computer viruses and anti-viruses. There is historical evidence showing that some of the developers of the early viruses have also become the world’s experts in creating anti-virus programs. Spending a fortune to have all the knowledge on how to detect synthetics – and, seemingly, how to detect synthetics that other companies have put into the market – is one thing. Developing a trademark mechanism that would, presumably, be applied to one’s own production is a different thing altogether.

Adding a substance to synthetics manufacturing to enhance its identification is not new in the market. But this De Beers “Near-Forevermark” patent, which was first applied for in 2004 and approved two years later, takes things farther. The De Beers patent seems to have been developed by scientists who are extremely conscious and careful to assure that the application of the marking techniques will in no way, shape or form impact the high commercial value of the synthetic gem-quality stones. They have also been very concerned that the mark will not affect the beauty of the stones after they are mounted in jewelry.

For example, the patent describes the placing of the mark (technically called a “tagging layer”) within the diamond in ways that will not add color to the gemstone, i.e. the mark shouldn’t impact the light rays reaching the eyes of the viewer. The mark should be positioned in a way that it remains visible when set in jewelry. These are all considerations that are hardly relevant for most of the industrial synthetic diamond applications.

Let there be no misunderstanding: Even though this patent can apply to a variety of synthetic diamond products, it is clear that the use of synthetics for jewelry purposes was foremost in the minds of those funding, developing and filing this patent. De Beers may say that this research is necessary to enable the development of the world’s best detection methods at the service of the diamond and jewelry industry and for the protection of the consumer. That is undoubtedly true. However, the UK Patent GB 2424903 takes things far beyond that. This patent not only tells you how to grow the mark within the material to begin with but also where to place the mark, which will provide the synthetic manufacturer with the widest range of marketing options. This is not just how to detect but rather how to market.

Vive le difference!