# Sub Ink made in Korea? Inktek, BaronSL



## jaysonA (Mar 21, 2011)

Has anyone heard of these Brands?

Inktek, BaronSL?

SGIA had a lot of Sub ink competition.

Is Sawgrasses patent expiring?


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

jaysonA said:


> Has anyone heard of these Brands?
> 
> Inktek, BaronSL?
> 
> ...


 
I believe it is Inktec that recently signed a Sawgrass license. Again if there is not valid patent why are major corporations outside of this country at that signing license agreements? Here is the list of authorized sawgrass licensee's - 

BASF, Hilord Chemical, Huntsman (formerly Ciba Specialty Chemical), J-Teck, Kiian Group, Kiwa Chemical Industry Co., Mimaki Engineering Company, Nazdar, and Sensient Technologies.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> I believe it is Inktec that recently signed a Sawgrass license. Again if there is not valid patent why are major corporations outside of this country at that signing license agreements? Here is the list of authorized sawgrass licensee's -
> 
> BASF, Hilord Chemical, Huntsman (formerly Ciba Specialty Chemical), J-Teck, Kiian Group, Kiwa Chemical Industry Co., Mimaki Engineering Company, Nazdar, and Sensient Technologies.


All non-expired patents at USPTO are "valid".

The question to ask is "how do the _claims _of a patent apply to a specific invention?"_._ This is called _claim scope_. 

In litigation "Valid" patents are determined to be infringed upon or they are not infringed upon.

I don't recall any discusions here of a _valid_ or _not valid_ patent relating to Sawgrass, it is a question of _applicability_.

Suggest to google "patent troll" or "Patent NPE", perhaps then you will begin to understand the "truth" about what is going on.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> I believe it is Inktec that recently signed a Sawgrass license. Again if there is not valid patent why are major corporations outside of this country at that signing license agreements? Here is the list of authorized sawgrass licensee's -
> 
> BASF, Hilord Chemical, Huntsman (formerly Ciba Specialty Chemical), J-Teck, Kiian Group, Kiwa Chemical Industry Co., Mimaki Engineering Company, Nazdar, and Sensient Technologies.


Inside baseball, why would TOG care about SG ink before a certain date?

http://www.dyesub.org/forum/index.php?webtag=DSSI&msg=7100.1


http://www.dyesub.org/forum/index.php?webtag=DSSI&msg=7100.7


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> I believe it is Inktec that recently signed a Sawgrass license. *Again if there is not valid patent why are major corporations outside of this country at that signing license agreements?* Here is the list of authorized sawgrass licensee's -
> 
> *BASF, Hilord Chemical, Huntsman (formerly Ciba Specialty Chemical), J-Teck, Kiian Group, Kiwa Chemical Industry Co., Mimaki Engineering Company, Nazdar, and Sensient Technologies*.


Something you are missing ... in the >42 inch market why would any of these companies want to litigate with ClogGrass? It is so much cheaper to go ahead and just pay the toll than to fool with lawyers and spend years in court and _*huge*_ fees fighting over a a patent that will expire in just less than 3 years anyway. 

I don't know what the licensing fees cost but they have to be very reasonable, I recall J-Teck was costing like $125 - $150 per liter to >42 inch users ... something like that, probably the low end in price for the >42 market here. They sell cheaper in price than SG does, as does several of these companies SG licenses to. Just pay the toll and cross the bridge, still make good money. For an eye opener take a stroll over at Manufacturers, Suppliers, Exporters & Importers from the world's largest online B2B marketplace-Alibaba.com and look at ink prices. 

For these >42 inch people paying for a license it is not a concern about any patents being valid, applicable, etc. Even if one of those companies wanted to fight SG what would it get them? It would flood the entire sublimation market with $40 a liter inks (including markup) and bring in a lot more competitors. 

Paying the toll makes more sense to me if I were selling >42 inch inks ...

I can buy a liter and have it shipped to my door from China for $50 in single liter qnty. Do you have any idea how cheap this stuff is really is? Especially in 20 - 50 liter purchases?

Reality is that in this >42 inch market the prices are kept higher because of the patent and it is benefiting licensees. SG's "toll" is a _good thing_ for licensees if it keeps other non-licensed competitors out, and ink prices _artificially_ high.

Now if SG decided to keep this market all to themselves like they do the desktop, then it might make sense for a large format ink vendor to come in and challenge SG.

SG offering licenses reasonable to these people means SG gets a piece of the >42 inch "action", and a desktop monopoly. If SG didn't let people "play" in the >42 inch market and just kept _everything_ for themselves, someone would challenge their _weak_ patent, then SG stands to lose their desktop monopoly and their "tolls" on the >42 market. 

Don't you suppose that if SG patent is so powerful why doesn't SG just keep everything? If their patent is so well _constructed_ then there is nothing to worry about. The reality it is not in any of those businesses that you mention interest to open the floodgates.These businesses are not dumb and neither is SG. 

At least for the next 3 years of SG having a patent they can waive around, no matter how _poor_ it is, or how easily it can be challenged, everyone licensing gets a nice ride along with SG till the gravy train runs out.

Once the gravy rain runs _everyones_ sub ink prices collapses here in the US. 

It's not SG anyone fears in the >42 inch it's these guys below 

Sublimation Inks-Sublimation Inks Manufacturers, Suppliers and Exporters on Alibaba.com

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/448852248/SUBLIMATION_INK_FOR_EPSON_7710_9710.html

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/338282709/High_quality_sublimation_inks.html

Welcome to the future.


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

I am not missing anything. I have always contended there must be some validity to the patents or people such as Cobra would be advertising and selling dye sublimation ink and larger companies would not be licensing from Sawgrass. It has been you insisting there is nothing valid in the patents that would prevent Cobra from calling their ink dye sublimation and selling it. In short I deal in the real world and the real world companies like Cobra do not have countless dollars to fight against a company that has very experienced in-house attorneys that protect their market. I could careless about the fringes like Alibaba as maybe 1%, if that of dye sublimation ink used in this country comes from China. In short if this was a black and white issue there would already be significant number of dye sublimation ink providers here in the USA advertising and selling ink. You can cut and paste, create links, etc all you want trying to prove the patents do not apply but it does not change the fact that no has gone mainstream advertising and selling dye sublimation ink without a license from Sawgrass.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> I am not missing anything. I have always contended there must be some validity to the patents or people such as Cobra would be advertising and selling dye sublimation ink and larger companies would not be licensing from Sawgrass.
> 
> Yes the patent is valid. The owner of that patent has been _abusing_ it and claiming it means something it doesn't mean.
> 
> ...


See the markups above. Geez.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

jaysonA said:


> Has anyone heard of these Brands?
> 
> Inktek, BaronSL?
> 
> ...


The SG '907 patent expires 9/1/2014


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

way way too much time on your hands but a good job at being a revisionist.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> way way too much time on your hands but a good job at being a revisionist.


*What am I revising? State your case.* When you stated 

"There is NO company that I am aware of that markets and sells DYE SUBLIMATION ink to the desktop market. There is a reason that is the case. You can argue all the points all day long but it does not change the fact." 

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/dye-sublimation/t164081-3.html#post997791

I responded that there were several others in the sub ink desktop market (not in the SG fold), beyond the obvious one being Cobra.

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/dye-sublimation/t164081-3.html#post997829

There are several others as well but I just didn't take the time to look very hard. Ebay has a few.

If you just meant to say "No significant number of companies" selling dye sub ink in the desktop market or "no one Mainstream in the sub ink market." instead of "No Companies" just *man up* and state you meant to say the other things instead, no big deal. 

But don't spin things around after you were presented with _proof_ that other sub ink companies outside the SG fold exist for the desktop. BS

Quote

"In short if this was a black and white issue there would already be *significant number* of dye sublimation ink providers here in the USA advertising and selling ink. You can cut and paste, create links, etc all you want trying to prove the patents do not apply but it does not change the fact *that no has gone mainstream* advertising and selling dye sublimation ink without a license from Sawgrass." 

No where in any of my dialog I was arguing against "Significant number" or "mainstream" ????? You make it seem as though I was disputing those terms by your creation of a _new_ argument, I wasn't. I disputed your first statement (with proof) "No companies exist". Proving or not proving anything about the patent has *no* *relevance *to "the fact that no one has gone mainstream" as you state. 

Now who is revising? After facts were presented you changed from "no one", to "no one significant" and to "no one mainstream".


----------



## jaysonA (Mar 21, 2011)

Wow very detailed! Thanks

I don't use SG.


----------



## American logoZ (Sep 16, 2009)

jaysonA said:


> Wow very detailed! Thanks
> 
> I don't use SG.


Who do you use?


----------



## jaysonA (Mar 21, 2011)

BaronSL. 
EDS(Direct sublimation ink) products, buy EDS(Direct sublimation ink) products from alibaba.com

I like it, and much cheaper than SG! We can get the blackest black on these inks. Blacker than SG. SG tends to be brown under direct sunlight.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

jaysonA said:


> BaronSL.
> EDS(Direct sublimation ink) products, buy EDS(Direct sublimation ink) products from alibaba.com
> 
> I like it, and much cheaper than SG! We can get the blackest black on these inks. Blacker than SG. SG tends to be brown under direct sunlight.


Artanium black is like a "egg plant" purple/black.


----------



## American logoZ (Sep 16, 2009)

jaysonA said:


> BaronSL.
> EDS(Direct sublimation ink) products, buy EDS(Direct sublimation ink) products from alibaba.com
> 
> I like it, and much cheaper than SG! We can get the blackest black on these inks. Blacker than SG. SG tends to be brown under direct sunlight.


Do you use an ICC profile?


----------



## jaysonA (Mar 21, 2011)

Yes, I use a custom ICC. Most of the modifications for color, come from PS. 

FYI, you would be surprised how the quality changes when you change sub paper.


----------



## jemmyell (Jan 26, 2010)

Hi,

Did you modify your ICC profile by eye or use a colorimeter? With Cobra exiting the market there will probably be a LOT of interest in 'alternative' inks that can be directly imported. Color management will probably be extremely important during the next three years...

-James


----------



## jaysonA (Mar 21, 2011)

We used Profile Maker with an eye-one Pro. 

Another big difference is the coating and the whiteness of your product. For instance, we use ORCA Coated Mugs from PhotoUSA.

PhotoMugs.com - Coffee Mugs, Promotional Products, Shot Glasses, Beer Mugs, Canvas Bags, Personalized Gifts , Water Bottles

I don't do imprinted sub shirts. We use a a DTG.


----------



## jemmyell (Jan 26, 2010)

Hi,

Thanks! THAT is a really expensive profiling solution. Undoubtedly the best commercial hardware / software there is.

How did you partition your targets?

Have you only profiled hard surfaced items then?

-James


----------



## jaysonA (Mar 21, 2011)

Yes. I used (2) 12" x 12" tiles to measure the targets. 

Of course with sublimation color accuracy is inconstant, with time, temperature and coating variables . It took a while to create a profile.

What Kind of sublimation do you do? ceramic, glass, cotton?


----------



## jemmyell (Jan 26, 2010)

Hi,

we are just getting started. We are doing some vapor shirts but mostly other stuff to be heat pressed onto shirts. Our best products are shirt backs made from sublicloth and heat press sublimated patches. We are using the plain white twill from Twill USA and their PS965 adhesive. Really nice results. We cut the patches out on our laser (BrightStar 18" x 24" 60W).

Some of these are sewn on to shirts with our Toyota 9100 NET embroidery machine. Most are just heat pressed since that gives good results.

My daughter has gotten to be the exclusive shirt vendor for a club she is in at college. We are doing fund raising products for them. They are her first real customer.

-James


----------

