# Cheaper inks for dye sublimation - Cobra, etc.



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

Subli TOPIC 

Please, note that I put a lot of links here but be aware that  I’m not advertising or trying to bias your opinion ,I’m here simply to give you more info and then u can do your own research.
I will be more than happy only to learn from you if you get more or new info.
SUBLIMATION INKS is my favorite HOT topic at the moment. - March 2011
I just hate to pay 120 $ for 110 Milliliters water plus some drops of paint. 
There is Company called Sawgrass out there that want to make all people in this business to live in “consent reality” and look like idiots. I’m not a revolutionary guy or anything like that I just don’t like when people get stupid by numbers and agree with the bad situations in the world.
They are alternatives j Here are some of them 
Site that sells Sublimation inks from SINOINKS
sublimation
Their Inks are very low price 25$ per litter but the delivery to USA is 150$ for 4 Litters

The inks are actually from this company
FUJIINKS-Top Quality Dye Sublimation Inks For Digital Heat Transfer Printing
and they sell them here : Fujiinks - Top Quality Dye Sublimation Inks For Digital Transfer Printing 
the delivery there is 135$ to USA 
The inks are NOT good for EPSON 1400 they will clog the heads immediately 
To go around drying inks you need 
CLEANING PRINT HEAD SOFTWARE 
Download Printer Jockey
If you are all about using not original inks the money for this software will return back to you in 1 day. I would very strongly recommend this software for anybody using sublimation inks.
It’s the best cleaning print heads software for many model printers mostly Epson brand
bad thing is that one of the best option that allows scheduling cleanings Don’t work as soon as you exit the program/ software
In order this best option of the software to work you can’t exit the program. It has to stay always open on your desktop or minimized in the bar/ this inconvenience sucks.
http://www.c-horsesoftware.com company has to take this note and fix this inconvenience in the future.


Apollo Colours screen and litho ink manufacturer in the UK - Inks for Textiles
Company specialized in some interesting typeof inks 
Welcome to Sensient Technologies
Company that produce inks and other chemicals 

DyeSub.org - An educational site for dye sublimation and digital transfer printing.
Cool site for sublimation info A lot of info there a little bit outdated but very good 

Amazon.com: Sublimation Ink-CMKY for Heat Transfer Printing: Office Products
This is a link to show that Sublimation inks are sold not only by Sawgrass
This link in Amazon is up to date of my post may be in few weeks will disappear but you can search Sublimation inks in Google shopping cart or Amazon or eBay and you will find all sort of sublimation inks.

Ink World - The Most Widely Read Ink Magazine in the World
the Magazine everybody in printing should know about.
Ink World - The Most Widely Read Ink Magazine in the World
Here the same magazine listing a lot of US ink companies.
Home
company in Colorado USA selling Sublimation inks 
OTHER INKJET PRINTER INKS RECOMMENDATION
http://fillserv.com
Reseller of all type of inks, They do very good business and have very good prices
I buy inks for Canon IP Pixma printers from them by the gallon the price is very good for the excellent quality 
I saved ” big time “using my 20 Units Pixma ip 4700 and couple of 13 x 19 Canons
other site for supplies
Sublimation, Sublimation Ink, Sublimation ink cartridge, Heat press
SUBLIMATION PAPER 
http://beaverpaper.com/index.php/dye_sublimation_products/
The manufacturer of the best sublimation paper for Epson Printers using Sublimation Inks



ONLINE DESIGN T SHIRTS
Designing t-shirt online software offered by these companies: 
Do your own research and make selection between them 
I would recommend to call them and negotiate before buying anything:
CBSALLIANCE.COM | Online Custom Designer & Online Design Software, Custom Online T-shirt Design Software, Best LiveArt T Shirt Design Tool, Website & Web Development Application
design tool - designer - t shirt - ad specialties - expertLogo
E-commerce Website Development of Custom T-Shirt Design Software, Clothing, Accessory, apparel & Shoes.
Flash T-Shirt Designer v4
Online Design Software, Online Lettering Design, Online T-Shirt Design and Online Boat Lettering Design Tool - LiveArt
A video on how a tshirt printing company used DecoNetwork to help achieve their online goals
Online Flex / Flash T-shirt Design Tool, Custom Shirt Design Software Application
T-Shirt Design Software - Flash Tools 4.0 Download
Online Design Software, T Shirt Lettering Design Software, Printing Design Software - iScripts PrintLogic
One in infancy (very primitive) but its free 
jQuery Online T-Shirt Designer (Lite Version) for FREE!! | Intrapopture Studio
I will include more solutions in other posts 
Here is an interesting review for 2011
Custom T-Shirt Design Service Review 2011 - TopTenREVIEWS

Check all links to see who are the main players in the market and thinks what you can do better than them. Do some extensive research about the business aspect of these companies .It’s not wise idea to get into a business without knowing what it is going on at that business already. I see many people are just thrilled with the idea of t-shirt business and invest thousands of dollars and later on admitted it as that huge mistake. The equipment and the technology is just about 10 % of the entire business.
Be Very careful to buy expensive equipment before to get some clear idea for potential markets.


Have a good luck researching 
I’m in pain looking for a very good ink for T shirt on a good price It has to give me result as the original sawgrass inks but at 50 times cheaper price 
I use Epson 1400 but if cheap solution for inks exist I will switch to other printers immediately.
The price of the equipment’s( start up cost ) is not very important for me but the price of the supplies is very important . Whats the point to buy 300 $ printer and than to be forced to buy 1000 % ink set. That is definitely not for me .
If someone knows good solution please help


----------



## taricp35 (Dec 10, 2008)

Just about every post you have made is bashing Sawgrass. Now you go and write a book doing it. OK, enough already...we get it you don't like Sawgrass.


----------



## uncletee (Feb 25, 2007)

gunatausa; You said it all, Been subing since 1986, seen it all; the monopoly happened in the Balloon busniess way back then! Everyone should do there own research, just bought a epson wf 1100, with refillable carts and love it. P.S. Thanks,You know your facts, and because this is a forum. have a nice day.


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

taricp35 said:


> Just about every post you have made is bashing Sawgrass. Now you go and write a book doing it. OK, enough already...we get it you don't like Sawgrass.


More people need to start bashing Sawgrass as they are a plague to this industry. To compound the problem you can count on your fingers the number of companies that control the entire desktop dyesub market. Combine them with Sawgrass you have a completly closed market void of real competition. 

There is something very wrong with the concept that a company can produce an inferior product and gouge the market on price. I would challenge anyone to find an industry expert that is unbiased that will stand up and talk about quality of Artainium or Sublijet ink. They basically destroy Epson printers and seem to have done the same to Ricohs. 

Why is it virtually no wide format sublimators use Artainium/Sublijet ink? It is not only price but also the lack of great colors and the constant issue of clogging which means that they will destroy your print head much quickier than a quality ink. The only ink Sawgrass makes of any quality is Sublim. Why is Sublim not offered to the desktop market? 

For many ink price does not matter. If you are doing tiles, mugs, etc the cost of ink is not important. For those that consume ink, paying 8-10 times more just because you have a smaller printer is a bit over the top. The analogy I used before was imagine pulling up to a gas station and the person driving in the small car has to fill up with cruddy gas that clogs their fuel system and has to pay 8 - 10 times more than the guy pulling up in his 4 x 4 who gets the premium gas at 10 times less the cost of the small car. Makes no sense.

The only realistic way to solve the issue until the patents run out is to go wide format where very high quality ink runs $125 - 150 per liter. There are so many deals on places like ebay where you can find on barely used wide format Epsons for a very good price. Just look for one used for photography as they are the ones used the least.


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

taricp35 said:


> Just about every post you have made is bashing Sawgrass. Now you go and write a book doing it. OK, enough already...we get it you don't like Sawgrass.



should i like them ????????? and Who are "We"
your e sounds to me like you own this site and someone is paying tyou to to voice you point of view
U got me wrong again :
Im not saying that the company is bad or they have bad product , Just the opposite . I love their products and currently use them . All im saying that they are way too expensive. and im looking for alternatives .
here is some videos for you to check 
they are just fun videos but there is lot of wisdom 
After you see them ask yourself a question:
should a printer that has more than 2000 parts and a lot of technology inside weight around 2- 20 pounds should cost around 60 to 150 $ but 15 mlliliters ink for the same printer (usually chemicals mixed ) should cost 15 $
here are the videos :
People representing “THE PRINT PARTY” 
Here are some fun videos in You tube. I myself discovered all these stuff for the last 10 years observing what printer manufacturers are doing starting with the Non chipped cartridges for Canon printers 2001
So Im asking what will be the next insane move of the printer manufacturers to make/force You to buy consumables .
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rvo77iyQCoM[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCFLam5wn5I[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycD4XkUtbIw[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2XLNS0f2Rc[/media]



if you so much love sawgrass or if they give you commission than i can understand your reply to my post .
but other than that i just simply dont get your response 
this is a forum and thanks to this kind of internet format people can voice their opinions .other can criticize them 
Personally im here to learn something new not to listen biased opinions.


----------



## taricp35 (Dec 10, 2008)

gunatausa said:


> should i like them ?????????
> your e sounds to me like you own this site and someone is paying tyou to to voice you point of view
> U got me wrong again :
> Im not saying that the company is bad or they have bad product , Just the opposite . I love their products and currently use them . All im saying that they are way too expensive. and im looking for alternatives .
> ...


First, I was not disagreeing with you, I was just curious why all the post with the same rants? My point was... what you are saying is nothing new. Search the forums and would will find many more post regarding this very topic. Those of us that sublimate, are already aware of everything you are saying, and just like you are swearing at it, many will swear by it. In one post you called people idiots for buying Sawgrass. Why do they have to be idiots? It's their choice whom they purchase their inks from. And since you stated you currently use there products...what does that make you?

Just so you no, I DO NOT work for Sawgrass, and no one is paying me to voice my opinion. I was vacationing in Europe when I first saw the sublimation process, and the owner of the shop I was in gave me his contact in China, and I have been buying my ink there ever since. I have never tried Sawgrass inks. Everything I no about the company is from what is posted on these boards. Why should I care what they are selling their inks for I get mine from China. It does not affect me. If you disagree with what Sawgrass is doing, then don't buy from them. Simple! You have obviously done enough research to no that you can get inks elsewhere. You keep talking about how you are trying to find a cheap ink, looking at all the information you have posted, one would believe you have already found it. Yes this is a forum where people can voice there opinion and just like you voiced yours, I voiced mine. It's just an opinion!


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

On-line Jerseys said:


> More people need to start bashing Sawgrass as they are a plague to this industry. To compound the problem you can count on your fingers the number of companies that control the entire desktop dyesub market. Combine them with Sawgrass you have a completly closed market void of real competition.
> 
> There is something very wrong with the concept that a company can produce an inferior product and gouge the market on price. I would challenge anyone to find an industry expert that is unbiased that will stand up and talk about quality of Artainium or Sublijet ink. They basically destroy Epson printers and seem to have done the same to Ricohs.
> 
> ...


Well said.

I am a bit more optimistic though. SG vs.TOG let the "cat out of the bag". Most users just are not aware of it. 

The real issue for most desktop users is that the mainstream suppliers that sell SG and Art inks are locked in by an exclusive business arrangment to only sell SG, these extortions agreements on our suppliers were all secured well before the "cat was let out of the bag". 

So SG's best avenue for maintaining their monopoly is thru their established vendors being _locked_ and _technology_ _lock,_ like the Ricoh printers.

So one needs to look elsewhere for their inks or as you say get a used working >42. 

Of course if you have a >42 printer and it just happens to be broken (surely you didn't buy it that way ) and you accidently dumped sub inks that were meant for your broken >42 printer into your $125 WF1100? shame on you . 

The other option is support the brave souls who have figured out that the Ink Baron's intellectual property does not apply to their product, and never did. These folks will be more and more visible even before we get to "the date". 

Michael


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

taricp35 said:


> First, I was not disagreeing with you, I was just curious why all the post with the same rants? My point was... what you are saying is nothing new. Search the forums and would will find many more post regarding this very topic. Those of us that sublimate, are already aware of everything you are saying, and just like you are swearing at it, many will swear by it. In one post you called people idiots for buying Sawgrass. Why do they have to be idiots? It's their choice whom they purchase their inks from. And since you stated you currently use there products...what does that make you?
> 
> Just so you no, I DO NOT work for Sawgrass, and no one is paying me to voice my opinion. I was vacationing in Europe when I first saw the sublimation process, and the owner of the shop I was in gave me his contact in China, and I have been buying my ink there ever since. I have never tried Sawgrass inks. Everything I no about the company is from what is posted on these boards. Why should I care what they are selling their inks for I get mine from China. It does not affect me. If you disagree with what Sawgrass is doing, then don't buy from them. Simple! You have obviously done enough research to no that you can get inks elsewhere. You keep talking about how you are trying to find a cheap ink, looking at all the information you have posted, one would believe you have already found it. Yes this is a forum where people can voice there opinion and just like you voiced yours, I voiced mine. It's just an opinion!


I did not find ALL the good inks , 
i just want to find the best for the money .
and you are right about the "idiot" thing . I can admit that buing sawgrass makes me an idiot , but i dont want other people to to feel like the same way . thats why all people should know that they are alternatives. i will test everything that is on the market for this year and will give statistics and probably will make a video tutorial or something.its not that sawgass have something special they just advertise very well.
and also the problem is that many people find a solutions for themselves but never share it with others. that is another reason for companies like j-teck to be nobody and sawgrass to be the only way


----------



## texasjack49 (Aug 4, 2008)

Why not just use Cobra Inks High Temp ink? It's much cheaper especially with refillable carts.
We use an Epson 4800 to sub.


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

Michael - when you refer to the cat being let out of the bag with the TOG situation can you please expand? 

If you really look at this there are less than 5 companies controlling the entire desktop market in dyesub. Makes it very easy for Sawgrass . Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why everything that has to do with dye sublimation is so over priced. There is NO COMPETITION. The Ricoh situation clearly demonstrated the premise that there will never be truth and disclosure for the consumers under the current dye sub cartel. I have never seen so much feet shuffling on such a simple topic that was clearly something that could have been easily and honestly addressed. Still waiting on the blog that was going to explain the issues. 

You are much more in the know than most of us and wondering at what point are patent laws being broken legally if someone uses a quality ink such as J-Teck, etc in a desktop printer? Is it the end user, it is the distributor that sold it to the end user? Just stunned that there is not a large 2nd teir market for quality ink currently unavailable to desktop printers.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

On-line Jerseys said:


> Michael - when you refer to the cat being let out of the bag with the TOG situation can you please expand?
> 
> If you really look at this there are less than 5 companies controlling the entire desktop market in dyesub. Makes it very easy for Sawgrass . Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why everything that has to do with dye sublimation is so over priced. There is NO COMPETITION. The Ricoh situation clearly demonstrated the premise that there will never be truth and disclosure for the consumers under the current dye sub cartel. I have never seen so much feet shuffling on such a simple topic that was clearly something that could have been easily and honestly addressed. Still waiting on the blog that was going to explain the issues.
> 
> You are much more in the know than most of us and wondering at what point are patent laws being broken legally if someone uses a quality ink such as J-Teck, etc in a desktop printer? Is it the end user, it is the distributor that sold it to the end user? Just stunned that there is not a large 2nd teir market for quality ink currently unavailable to desktop printers.


Here is a summary of what happened and the implications of the SG/TOG patent lawsuit.

TOG and SG eventually settled out of court but it was only after TOG won was is called the "Markman hearing"

The "Order" document shows the outcome of the Markman hearing. 

The order came before the final disposition, called the "AGREED FINAL PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL"

This document is a the mutually agreeable settlement, it is not something the judge in this case constructed, but the Judge did approve the mutually agreeable settlement ... 

http://www.dyesub.org/articles/Final judgement-dismissal1.jpg

(note in some browers you may have to need to zoom in if the browser auto-sizes the image or just download it.)

http://www.mgparrish.com/17711722614.pdf

is the Court's order relating to the conclusion of the "Markman" hearing. A "Markman" hearing in essence is where a different judge hears the technical arguments of the case. For the rest of this post I refer to that document as the "Order".

The outcome of the Markman hearing usually decides who is going to win and oftens leads to a "Summary Judgment" from the Judge. 

Summary judgement means there is enough facts in the case and the judge can decide the outcome without going to trial. 

Whoever loses in the Markman hearing it usually means "Game Over". The document clearly shows TOG would prevail and they were asked if they (TOG) would like the Judge to proceed to Summary Judgement.

Before the "AGREED FINAL PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL" occured and after the "Order" document, TOG and SG had to create another legal agreement on $$$ settlement terms and support of TOG's existing customer base.

That document is private and outside of this court case. It was necessary for TOG and SG to agree on financial terms for the dispostion of the TOG business.

http://www.sublibrite.com/id52.html

This is the document that shows SG and TOG were negotiating out of court and asked the court to extend the Summary Judgement phase. This is after the "Order" and before the "AGREED FINAL PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL"

http://www.mgparrish.com/8.pdf

A common misconception I hear is "Sawgrass has _the_ patent for sublimation inks for ink jet".

In the TOG vs SG patent lawsuit the outcome all hinged on a fairly simple point ... what was added to the ink to keep the print heads from clogging and work "reliably"?

*Quote (page 2 of "Order")*

"The crux of the ’907 Patent’s invention, however, is the Patent’s solution to the problem of maintaining a stable mixture of insoluable dye solids in liquid ink so that the dye solids remain dispersed in the ink over time and do not agglomerate, or clump together, and separate at the bottom of the ink cartridge."

*Comment:*

This is focus of the lawsuit. To make this patent unique you need a chemical that prevents clogging. 

Prior art was noted when Sawgrass applied for the '907 patent. In the late 80's or early 90's CASI Systems was selling a Textronics ink jet printer and put sublimation ink in it for heat transfer. This is not to be confused with the solid ink printers that Textronics designed and later sold off to Xerox.

This means that the patent is not so broad to mean "Sawgrass has _the_ patent for sublimation inks for ink jet". The patent has to be narrowed to mean something more specific, more narrow scope. 

In the language of the '907 patent the "emulsifying enforcing agent" is the chemical that resolves clogging and is what makes the patent _unique_.

So just what is a "emulsifying enforcing agent"?

In this litigation what SG wanted was the term "emulsifying enforcing agent" to mean "a chemical in liquid or solubilized form that is added to heat activated dye solids to disperse and stabilize the dye solids within a liquid solvent."

Simple translation, add chemicals to the ink to solve the clogging problem. Keep the dye partices from seperating out and "clumping" or sticking together.

Prior to this litigation SG had sucessfully used this meaning to win previous cases. It was ruled that way in older Markman hearings against other companies.

However, in the "Markman hearing" (for the TOG lawsuit) TOG sucessfully argued for (and the court agreed) that 

*Quote (page 5 of "Order")*

"Based on the intrinsic evidence in the record, the Court construes the term EEA to mean a chemical agent that disperses and stabilizes heat-activated dye solids within a liquid solvent *and* protects the dye solids from exposure to heat prior to and *during *the printing process." (bold emphasis mine)

*Comment:*

They (the court) came to this conclusion that the term "emulsifying enforcing agent" (EEA) had to mean a chemical that had 2 functions, one function is for the chemical to eliminate clumping and resolve clogging. 

The other function was to protect the dye solids from exposure to heat *prior to *and *during* the printing process. If the dye is heated during the printing process bad things happen. And we know what happens when sublimation dye is heated. 

_During_ the printing process means the ink being delivered through the print head and not from the heat press. Printing is the act of creating the paper transfer. No need to protect the inks while it is on the heat press "printing" we _want to _expose the ink to heat then. Hmmm.

Both chemical functions were "joined" and *not* seperable. The bold "and" in the quote above is what joins them. If "or" was used then infringing either chemical function, or both functions together, would be sufficient to infringe the patent; one or the other chemical functions, or both chemical functions.

The court concluded (from the Markman hearing) that based on the USPTO review of the patent initially during the process of seeking the patent (patent prosecution) the USPTO required that SG include a heat limitation and rejected the patent. 

This rejection does not mean they could not get the patent, it meant they had to fix the problem and _narrow_ the scope of the patent due to ...

*Quote (page 8-9 of Order)*

"The Court next examines the ’907 Patent’s prosecution history. TOG argues that, during prosecution, Sawgrass made a number of disavowals of claim scope to avoid rejections and thereby added certain limitations to the meaning of the term EEA. TOG first argues that Sawgrass added a heat protection-related limitation to avoid rejection by distinguishing its invention from prior art references cited by the examiner in rejecting all proposed claims on obviousness and other grounds. 

Specifically, in the Office Action dated November 10, 1994, the examiner rejected all of Sawgrass’s proposed claims as obvious in light of Japanese Patent No. 57-102390 and U.S. Patent No. 5,350,929, which disclose a thermal transfer printing method (that does not specifically require the use of an ink jet printer) and a thermal ink jet printer, respectively." "In distinguishing the invention of the ’907 Patent from the prior art cited by the examiner, Sawgrass stated in its Response to the Official Action Dated November 10, 1994 at 6, Pl.’s App. 278, that "[t]he emulsifying enforcing agent . . . wraps the dye particles to shield and protect heat activated or sublimation dye *prior to and during **the printing of the ink* by the ink jet printer."
　
"Sawgrass further sought to distinguish its invention with the Declaration of Ming Xu Under 37 CFR § 1.132 at 4, Pl.’s App. 290, in which Dr. Ming Xu, one of the listed inventors of the ’907 Patent, stated that Lignosol, one of the patent’s preferred EEAs,"disperses the dye into the carrier, and holds *and* shields the dye from exposure to heat *during* the printing process performed by the ink jet printer." (bold emphasis mine)

*Comment:* 

This means that using a chemical to prevent clumping or clogging is _not unique _and _prior art _existed. Because of this the 2 functions that the chemical "EEA" was supposed to do had to be *joined* according to the USPTO, otherwise the USPTO was going to disallow the patent. 

Now here below is the "smoking gun", and that gun is still smoking today. Besides the USPTO history, the quote from the "Order" below _has huge implications for any potential future litigation over *other* parties alleged to infringe on the patent._

*Quote (page 9 of "Order")*

"While Sawgrass initially disputed the existence of a heat-related limitation, Sawgrass conceded during the _Markman _hearing in this case that the EEA does indeed serve a heatshielding function. _See, e.g._, _Markman _Tr. 37, ll. 1-5 ("[The EEA] does shield from heat, and as a full reading of that office response shows, Dr. Xu was referring to heat not just in the printing process but *prior to printing and other instances where the dye might be exposed to heat*." (statement of G. Trenholm Walker))." (bold emphasis mine)

*Comment:* 
*BIG OOPS! LAST NAIL IN THE COFFIN!*

*Quote (page 9 of "Order")*

"Accordingly, the Court finds that the invention of the ’907 Patent includes a heat protection limitation as suggested in Sawgrass’s response."

*Comment: *
*GAME OVER FOR SG*

**********************************************
So what is all this "heat protection limitation" all about?

And why is this important?

Why would SG not want a heat limitation and why would TOG want a heat limitation?
**********************************************

It's real simple, piezo ink jets (Epson's) DO NOT use heat to transport the ink through the print head, piezo uses electrical charge to transport the inks and *do not* need heat, so _no need to add a chemical that shields the dyes from heat if your target printer is a piezo _(Epson).

If you are trying to make the ink work in a _thermal_ ink jet, like HP or Canon, then you need to add a chemical that shields the dye from heat during the printing process since heat is the mechanism for ink transport in those printers.

*Flashback 1994*

In the '907 patent the description of the problem to be solved was based on free flow and "Bubble Jet" printers

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5488907.pdf

Reference "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" in the patent.

"The primary types of ink jet printers currently in use fall into three categories phase change, free flow, and bubble jet.

The inks or dyes used in phase change ink jet printing are contained in a solid compound which changes state by the application of heat to liquify the solid, whereupon the ink composition is printed. 

Free flow and bubble jet printers use liquid inks, although the actual printing process of free flow ink jet printers differes from bubble jet printers."

*Comment:*

The "phase change ink jet" refers to what is now sold by Xerox, these inks are solid and are like crayons. 

"Free flow" ink jets are like the original Textronix ink jet printers that were first used in sublimation ink jet printing, and no longer around in the consumer market. These use gravity basically to transport the inks through the print heads.

"Bubble Jets" are Canon printers. HP makes a thermal ink jet that transports ink using heat, different from "Bubble Jets" but still uses heat in the ink transport.

Reference "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" in the patent.

"The use of heat by all ink jet printers presents the problem recognized in the Hale patents of printing heat activated inks in a non activated form by means of such printers, since the ink is exposed to high temperatures by the printer. Bubble jet printers, for example, heat the ink during the printing process to around the boiling point of the ink solvent, which is typically water."

*Comment:*

The Hale patents mentioned were the use of wax thermal printers like Seiko had and Fargo (I had a Fargo printer and used the SG sublimation ribbon). Laser sublimation as well. These technologies also had the need for protecting sub dyes from heat as well, and was what SG was marketing before ink jet sublimation.

The language of the patent clearly shows a problem of heating the ink in the print head during printing in the Bubble Jet printers.


*Question:*

Where are "Piezo" ink jet printers in this patent? They are not "Free Flow" or thermal. 

Why were they not mentioned? they use a totally different method to transport the ink through the print heads, electrical charge.

*Answer:*

The '907 patent was initially released in Sept. 1994. 

At that time Epson had just released the "Color Stylus" printer and the "Color Stylus II" was released in 1995. All the research and development SG did for this patent had to be going back a ways in time, way before the Epsons hit the market. 

All the ink formulations SG came up with to overcome the problem of heat in the print head and all the legal back and forth between the inventor and the patent attorney who drafted the patent took some time. So this means the "art" of the '907 was before the Epson printers were an alternative. That would explain why SG did not mention a different type of ink jet NOT using heat in the print head to transport the ink.

*SHOCKER!! The SG patent was targeting Bubble Jet printers! Epson piezo Technology came along and solved the heating problem of the inks in the print head for them!*

But this left SG a problem, their patent could be worked around if the "heat protection limitation" was required in their patent! That is why TOG argued for the "heat protection limitation" and SG argued to exclude it.

You need to put a chemical to keep the dye particles from "clumping" in _any_ ink jet printer, but in the inks jets that use heat you need a chemical that also shields the particles from heat during the printing process as well.

If the definition of "EEA" (emulsifying enforcing agent)chemicals are broad and means only a chemical that prevents clogging, then you can include Epson printers.

Otherwise you are stuck only being able to claim Canon and HP type ink jets which we all know no one is using here for sublimation.

*Question:*

If TOG was winning why not just let the Judge the decide and proceed to Summary Judgement?

*Answer:*

TOG had no choice to fight back initially, they were going to be forced out of their ink jet sublimation ink business.

During the litigation TOG was allowed to continue to sell sublimation inks and the prices were about 75% of the price for SG ink, still a HUGE markup compared to what the inks would sell for in a competitive market. In essence a "duopoly" existed during the litigation.

For TOG allowing the case to proceed to Summary Judgement was the "Nuclear Option", they could collect $$$ from SG by winning the case, but at the expense or their sublimation ink business allowing an open market (very very cheap inks) to proceed.

Of course SG was assured of open market if the case proceeded, but TOG "held all the good cards" to force a lucrative $$$ business agreement.

So SG needed this to go away as quietly as possible.

When I stated "Nuclear Option" this means mutually assured destruction if you use the Nuclear Option.

The "AGREED FINAL PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL" document has TOG agreeing that the ink did not have a heat limitation, however, that agreement is only valid between TOG and SG.

The agreement also mentions that TOG (and it's agents) not reveal how to assist others to challenge the patent.

But that agreement does not apply to anyone else. So even if the lawsuit made TOG go away, the _teaching_ of the lawsuit and the prior art that was revealed to narrow the patent to have a heat limitation still exists, along with SG having to admit the patent has a heat limitation and is in the public record forever. That Genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in.


----------



## ashamutt (Feb 22, 2008)

mgparrish said:


> Here is a summary of what happened and the implications of the SG/TOG patent lawsuit.
> 
> TOG and SG eventually settled out of court but it was only after TOG won was is called the "Markman hearing"
> 
> ...


 

Best post I have read in a long time!!
Thanks so much for this info.

I hope that it will be VERY useful to lots of non-sawgrass "sub ink" sellers!


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

mgparrish said:


> Here is a summary of what happened and the implications of the SG/TOG patent lawsuit.
> 
> TOG and SG eventually settled out of court but it was only after TOG won was is called the "Markman hearing"
> 
> ...


WOW 
Congratulations Mike 
I just love your post 
Its my personal opinion but i have to mention it 
: I think your post is one of the most valuable post ever in this site .
i just love it , idont know what you do and how you had the time to do this resurch but its just briliant
Many people dont pay attention to these things
they just want the final results such as : "I want cheap inks" why i cant have business that is based on competing supplier rather that Im forced to have one supplier only :"

When company like sawgrass comes with the tools they use 
you can see that these are smart people . to force almost anybody to use their products 
The lawsuit is just one way to Buy out competitors
the other way i mentioned is simply : very good advertisement 
Unfortunately people are like robots that is easy to program 
if they are told " if you are in USA your only solution is Sawgrass inks" many people will start repeating this without a fraction of a doubt , till it becomes TRUE
if you make many people repeat the same thing for a long enough time it will become true 
that what Sawgrass did starting with their distributors 
they are trained to keep repeating : this is the inks you can ONLY use to do Sublimation on t-shirt. "
after that are the trilled customers that brings even more customers.
in a way what Mcdonalds did to the burger that's what Sawgrass did to the sublimation 
its funny thing that in where i come from originally - Bulgaria 
when people want to say copy machine they dont say the word Copier they say Xerox. in other words some brands are equal to the products . 
I was recently in Sony museum in NYC
and let me tell you that if you are kid you will believe that many of the nowadays products like Cell phone TV even PC was invented by Sony 
This company mixed the history of the inventions with their own products so well that you don't know which is what 
That is how the big companies operate . I personally don't mind that because i have enough knowledge to make the difference but what about the many people that are not technical or just too young . why spread bad ideas promoting monopoly of which every body suffer but the company .
Its good to have the big companies to make a lot of money its bad when they want to make all the money.it becomes more important to kill the competition and the focus goes in wrong direction, instead killing competitors by being more innovative and discovering better technologies the big companies try to use old technologies like courts and power to kill their competitors
, My 2 cents of optimism 
they are always alternatives

your post is so inspiring 
Thanks agian 

its my outlet to vent for today 
thanks Mike 
they should be more people like you in the world


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

The one key piece missing from Mike's post is that TOG stated that they never sold ink into South Carolina. Thus it allowed for jurisdiction to be established in Texas and not South Carolina where there is already a precedent. This allowed for a different interpretation... but does not mean that another judge will go with the previous rulings in South Carolina, Texas or any other state. If my memory is correct, TOG sued Sawgrass first in Texas and Sawgrass later sued in South Carolina. The two cases were combined in Texas (thus why the heading at the top looks weird).

Nice summary Mike!

Mark


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

Very interesting read Mike - thanks. 

This still brings me back to what laws has prevented a company from buying fully licensed ink and reselling it to the desktop market? 

What is your take on what happens in 2014 when the patents expire? Again you have less than 5 companies controlling the entire desktop market. Common sense tells you they can not continue to do business as they are today. But maybe I am wrong as I would think no one in their right mind would use Sawgrass ink on a wide format printer but surely there are those that do. 

The entire dye sub market is a cartel with few choices and over priced goods. What separates Sawgrass from the rest of them is they laugh at you while they screw you. Think about it. What if Beaver changed their pricing to be reflective of Sawgrass. People would be paying 8 times more for a package of paper than people pay for a roll of paper. What if Vapor sold shirts to those that did not have a MaxiPress for 8 times more than they sold the shirt to someone that did? People would be outraged yet somehow Sawgrass and their master distributors have conditoned their customers to accept it. 

In closing I did find it ironic that part of the patent revolves around their solution to prevent head clogging. Almost laughable.


----------



## uncletee (Feb 25, 2007)

Very Interesting!?!?!? Would love cheap ink prices again. have a nice day uncletee.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

DAGuide said:


> The one key piece missing from Mike's post is that TOG stated that they never sold ink into South Carolina. Thus it allowed for jurisdiction to be established in Texas and not South Carolina where there is already a precedent. This allowed for a different interpretation... but does not mean that another judge will go with the previous rulings in South Carolina, Texas or any other state. If my memory is correct, TOG sued Sawgrass first in Texas and Sawgrass later sued in South Carolina. The two cases were combined in Texas (thus why the heading at the top looks weird).
> 
> Nice summary Mike!
> 
> Mark


Thanks. Yes the case was weird in that jurisdiction was at issue. In fact the jurisdiction argument had to be answered by a higher Federal court.

In future litigations each case is unique and will still have to be litigated. No guarantee of results, however, a very revealing blueprint for one to follow now exists.

Michael


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

I marked up below from your post.


Very interesting read Mike - thanks. 

This still brings me back to what laws has prevented a company from buying fully licensed ink and reselling it to the desktop market? 
*******************************
It's not laws preventing what you describe, per se ... it's the license agreement itself, the question is are you are a party to a license agreement or not? 

If you don't have a license describing "terms of use" then there is no contract, and no contract law to litigate.

A software license is an example of of a license agreement typically issued at purchase, and mentioned in the software documentation. You either agree to the terms or not buy the software.

If the product in question has language of a license affixed to the product, or it's packaging, or at the "point of sale", then not following the "terms of use" could mean breach of contract, and applicable contract laws decide.

I know this from working for companies that has license agreements associated with their products.


If someone sells you something without a license and having "no resale" conditions in the license terms, and no laws exist to prevent you from selling it (i.e liquor or tobbaco ) then you should be able to resell that. I'm not an attorney so you need to do your own reseach on that though.


I have stumbled across a vendor selling into the >42 inch market sublimation market that has some interesting language concerning what you do with the ink once it is in your hands, they just state that you are "on your own" if "3rd parties" come after you. 

That is not the exact language but a summary, I don't wish to cause them any harrasment from a "3rd party"

******************************
What is your take on what happens in 2014 when the patents expire? 
******************************
I can only speculate on that, but here is my speculation.

Depends on what contract terms are for the existing SG vendors have in regards to their condition for the "privilege" of selling the existing sub inks as to what they do once the "date" arrives.

I'm not sure if the reseller agreements can be extended beyond the patent duration, or not. So it's not clear to me if existing vendors will offer several brands of sub ink including SG inks or others, or if they drop SG and go with inks from others completly.

I do see new and "outside" vendors coming in an tearing into the existing market held by current SG resellers if the "outside" vendor has no ink contract restrictions.

I do know one vendor who was selling both TOG and SG during the patent litigation and was told to drop the TOG ink "or else".

I do see that many users will still be "locked in" due to having art files from existing on-going customers, and of course those "locked-in" due to having a Ricoh.

But for sure the market will be opened up.
*******************************

Again you have less than 5 companies controlling the entire desktop market. Common sense tells you they can not continue to do business as they are today. But maybe I am wrong as I would think no one in their right mind would use Sawgrass ink on a wide format printer but surely there are those that do. 

The entire dye sub market is a cartel with few choices and over priced goods. What separates Sawgrass from the rest of them is they laugh at you while they screw you. Think about it. What if Beaver changed their pricing to be reflective of Sawgrass. People would be paying 8 times more for a package of paper than people pay for a roll of paper. What if Vapor sold shirts to those that did not have a MaxiPress for 8 times more than they sold the shirt to someone that did? People would be outraged yet somehow Sawgrass and their master distributors have conditoned their customers to accept it. 

In closing I did find it ironic that part of the patent revolves around their solution to prevent head clogging. Almost laughable.

*************************
It's also interesting that SG is not marketing ink for HP and Canon. So brings to question if the real solution of the heat problem in their patent actually works. 

Might explain why they are not selling sub inks for thermal ink jet like HP and Canon, and why it took them 3 years after the patent filing to get sub inks out to the marketplace.


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

There is one other thing that comes up if and when the sublimation ink market opens up. For dye sub distributors, the most expensive cost on their side is tech support. So some of them will not be as quick to jump to new inks as people think they would. With any type of ink, the consistency and quality control over time is absolutely a key. They already have a ton of variables (i.e. changes to paper, heat press settings, differences in substrates,...) that can affect how long a tech support call is. I have seen the same fabric and metal have different cure settings when using different inks. Thus, many of them will spend a decent amount of time testing new inks before making a switch.

Mark


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

DAGuide said:


> There is one other thing that comes up if and when the sublimation ink market opens up. For dye sub distributors, the most expensive cost on their side is tech support. So some of them will not be as quick to jump to new inks as people think they would. With any type of ink, the consistency and quality control over time is absolutely a key. They already have a ton of variables (i.e. changes to paper, heat press settings, differences in substrates,...) that can affect how long a tech support call is. I have seen the same fabric and metal have different cure settings when using different inks. Thus, many of them will spend a decent amount of time testing new inks before making a switch.
> 
> Mark


Agree.

But I think this will all work itself over time. Survival of the fittest will rule the day eventually. We will have low cost and good quality, it just may be a bit chaotic at first.

I see new scenarios for the market.

1. "Mom and Pop" buying in bulk from Alibaba and rebottle.

2. Existing 3rd party refill ink suppliers like MIS Associates (inksupply.com) and others adding sublimation inks to their existing product line. 

Some of the pigment ink manufacturers that sell ink to these suppliers also make sublimation ink.

Some of these companies are already in the pigment transfer market and sell heat transfer inks and transfer papers. 

3. Existing >42 suppliers that are currently buying an SG "ticket". Some may choose to sell lower ink bottle sizes like 110mL, 220mL half liter. Once the license restrictions are removed these existing suppliers could sell into the desktop market.

4. Existing small format sublimation and blanks vendors who sell SG and Artanium inks now. This will be very interesting to see how hard SG fights to try and keep those vendors from selling non-SG inks alongside SG inks.

5. New suppliers moving into the >42 inch market as the license burden is lifted. 

6. And of course the 800 lb. Gorilla in the room. Chinese and Korean ink manufacturers. 

Between all these and other possible scenarios I see good things happening, of course some hickups along the way.

Michael


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

Mike, do you have any idea on how the license works between Sawgrass and companies like J-Teck, Mimaki, etc? Was this a one time cost to these companies or do they pay a royalty for each liter of ink they sell? What effect on price does this license have on a liter of ink? 

Do you also have any idea why Sawgrass prevents their own cartel from selling Sublim to the desktop market? I do not believe there is one person that would claim Artainum and Sublijet ink is anywhere near the quality of Sublim yet it is not available to the desktop market. There has to be a reason they continue to sell poor quality ink to the desktop market. From the outside looking in it seems insane for a company to sell ink that cloggs printers and produces subpar colors when they have an alternative.


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

DAGuide said:


> There is one other thing that comes up if and when the sublimation ink market opens up. For dye sub distributors, the most expensive cost on their side is tech support. So some of them will not be as quick to jump to new inks as people think they would. With any type of ink, the consistency and quality control over time is absolutely a key. They already have a ton of variables (i.e. changes to paper, heat press settings, differences in substrates,...) that can affect how long a tech support call is. I have seen the same fabric and metal have different cure settings when using different inks. Thus, many of them will spend a decent amount of time testing new inks before making a switch.
> 
> Mark


I do believe that when the restrictions are lifted the pricing will be based on how much ink you purchase versus what printer you use. As far as technical support - there are more and more companies and people understanding tech support is no longer a cost but a source of revenue. Take a look at the hundreds of millions GoDaddy has made using this concept. Their "tech support" people are in reality sales people. David at Conde figured this out as well - do you think his participation helping people cost Conde money or makes Conde money. The only true mystery is why everyone has not figured out that support is the easiest way to sell products and services. Who are you going to trust more if they suggest you buy something - salesperson or a "support" person?


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

On-line Jerseys said:


> Mike, do you have any idea on how the license works between Sawgrass and companies like J-Teck, Mimaki, etc? Was this a one time cost to these companies or do they pay a royalty for each liter of ink they sell? What effect on price does this license have on a liter of ink?
> 
> Do you also have any idea why Sawgrass prevents their own cartel from selling Sublim to the desktop market? I do not believe there is one person that would claim Artainum and Sublijet ink is anywhere near the quality of Sublim yet it is not available to the desktop market. There has to be a reason they continue to sell poor quality ink to the desktop market. From the outside looking in it seems insane for a company to sell ink that cloggs printers and produces subpar colors when they have an alternative.


I'm not privy to the license cost or details, if a one time deal on on-going.

The reason that SG is licensing to >42 suppliers who can buy ink from somewhere else (or make their own) and sell in the US, is a result of a settlement between BASF and SG in that patent litigation. 

SG kept the desktop market for themselves for the obvious benefit of maintaining a monopoly there, and also sells into the large format market as well competing with the >42 inch licensees.

Michael


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

On-line Jerseys said:


> Mike, do you have any idea on how the license works between Sawgrass and companies like J-Teck, Mimaki, etc? Was this a one time cost to these companies or do they pay a royalty for each liter of ink they sell? What effect on price does this license have on a liter of ink?
> 
> Do you also have any idea why Sawgrass prevents their own cartel from selling Sublim to the desktop market? I do not believe there is one person that would claim Artainum and Sublijet ink is anywhere near the quality of Sublim yet it is not available to the desktop market. There has to be a reason they continue to sell poor quality ink to the desktop market. From the outside looking in it seems insane for a company to sell ink that cloggs printers and produces subpar colors when they have an alternative.


That is exactly what insane company would do....
Sony Claims invented OLED screens 
to produce them will be 200 times cheaper than to make LED and 500 cheeper than to make plazma srens
yet the cost of the first on the market is around 3000$ for 11 inch screen 
when consumer buy products like that they dont ask the comon sense question such as " how this sheet of plastic can cost 3000$ ' They are just amazed with wonder " woowwwwwwww
look how thin is that thing " , "i have to have right now"

This is what i call insane economy supported by insane consumers where insane companies are flourishing .
its not the company that does the damage its the supporters( consumers that dont use their heads)

As one user here said "these are smart people , everyone of us would do the same " referring the sawgrass people 
No doubt ............


----------



## gunatausa (Mar 21, 2011)

texasjack49 said:


> Why not just use Cobra Inks High Temp ink? It's much cheaper especially with refillable carts.
> We use an Epson 4800 to sub.


I try to call Richard in Cobra inks 
he seems to be very busy all the time 
i called him 2 times and his assistant promised that he will call me back but he did not 
I will test Cobrainks as well and will post results
thanks for the advice


----------



## mn shutterbug (Mar 19, 2009)

gunatausa said:


> I try to call Richard in Cobra inks
> he seems to be very busy all the time
> i called him 2 times and his assistant promised that he will call me back but he did not
> I will test Cobrainks as well and will post results
> thanks for the advice


IMO, that would be a good reason to stay away from Cobra. Tech support in this industry is extremely valuable.


----------



## American logoZ (Sep 16, 2009)

taricp35 said:


> I was vacationing in Europe when I first saw the sublimation process, and the owner of the shop I was in gave me his contact in China, and I have been buying my ink there ever since.


Care to share?


----------



## iainlondon (May 11, 2010)

mn shutterbug said:


> IMO, that would be a good reason to stay away from Cobra. Tech support in this industry is extremely valuable.


_I have always found Cobrainks customer care & back up support to be very good and second to none.._


----------



## balata (Jan 16, 2012)

Gunatausa,

You mentioned the Sinoinks and that they clog even worse than SG. Have they changed their ink recently? I had some in an Epson 1400 that sat for 3 months. On startup it gave a good test without even a cleaning. As someone that has several times thrown away a 1200 that sat for a few weeks, I was amazed.

Even with the $150 shipping it's still just a total of $300 for six LITERS of ink. I've just retired, but if I were still in it that would be my choice. The colors were great, only problem I had was the cheap bulk system I used, had a hard time pulling the ink through the long tubes. It looked like a clogged head problem, but when I switched to refillable cartridges everything worked like a charm.


----------

