Jim, The large class ring manufacturer I used to work for always
marked their bimetal rings. It was usually sterling/14K and their
own steel alloy/14K. I don’t think much, if any, 18K was used in
these rings. Robert
Dear Jim Binnion, Just a lateral comment about combined precious
metals pieces: In Australia it is normal trade practice to
hallmark for every precious metal used in the piece. It is the
norm to see pieces stamped “18ct and Platinum” or “18ct and
Palladium” or even “18ct and Sterling Silver” where appropriate.
18ct and .750 are both acceptable, although there is more of the
metric mark these days than the older parts of 24. Just my
farthing’s worth. Kind regards, Rex from Oz.
Hi all, I read with interest what I assume is about
the law in the U.S. the UK we have the oldest Hallmarking system
in the world. It was started in the 14th century and now all
pieces of silver and gold (except those of very low weight) have
to be hallmarked before they can be sold. All pieces must be
sent away to an Assay Office, fortunately mine nearest is in
London which is not far away. The Assay office test the metal
for purity. If the piece reaches the required standard it will
be marked with a quality mark showing the quality, say 9 ct
gold. A town mark showing which town the piece is hallmarked, a
date letter and the makers mark. The hallmark is a very good
sign of quality giving a lot of especially for
antique collectors.
Unfortunately the European Union want to scrap the hallmark
because No other member of the EU uses a legal hallmarking
system. It wants all members of the community to use a standard
mark which will be voluntary. personally I don’t see the sense
in destroying one of the oldest quality control systems in the
world. I would be interested to see what other UK makers think.
Richard Whitehouse
Silversmith & Jeweller
Hi all, I saw Richard Whitehouse’s letter on Hall marking in the
UK and his fears about the system being abandoned by EU.
In Sweden a the producers hallmark has been used since 1485 and
the town mark was added 1689. In 1754 the government took
control and added the year mark in 1759 whilst the law itself
dates from 1752. The marking system is consistent with an
unbroken line of year markings since 1759. This system is still
being used.
1988 the law of quality stamping in Sweden was abandoned and it
transformed into something you do if you like. Most of jewellers
today still mark their products using the old system and also
sending their stuff away for testing to get the traditional
quality mark.
Since the new laws of 1988 silver is hallmarked marked if the
silversmith wishes, Gold and Platinum has to be hallmarked if the
piece is more that 1 g. Since 1988 gold is allowed down to 14k
(earlier minimum was 18k).
Your hallmark, two or more letters, has to be registered,
otherwise you can not use it. It is kept unique for 20 years
after you stop to use it and together with the year mark (A11 for
1999) it assures that you can trace the master.
I assume that the fear in the UK is that the good-old-system
will parish but I assume that it is very much up to the trade…
In Sweden we use the quality mark (which we can not stamp
ourselves) as a marketing tool and people are so used to this
system that they more or less assume that it is used. It has not
gone away in these last 11 years but there is always a risk if
not guarded properly.
Best Regards
Lars Dahlberg/Gotland/Sweden
I have customers that copyright designs but I don’t ever recall
that a design has ever been defended. Perhaps their were a few.
The problem is a design need only be changed by 15% in order to
be a new design.
The jewelry industry is a difficult one to be creative without
stepping on someone else’s design. As you already know, there
are millions of designers and modelmakers worldwide. Creating a
new design each time is almost impossible.
Unfortunately, the jewelry market relies almost soley on time to
market. Ideally, designs today should be on the street tomorrow.
This is reality when designs are produced on a computer and
built overnight on a machine.
By the time you copyright a design, someone else has it on the
street. I think it is fair to say that designers have a pattern
and perhaps the pattern can be copyrighted. To copyright an
individual piece will be difficult and cost to much. The
copyright has to be researched and by the time you get it,
you’ve missed the window of opportunity for the design.
Sanders has several machines in Hong Kong. Each one of these
manufacturers designs 4 - 5 new rings per day (125 - 150 per
month). Approximately 1000 new designs per month from Hong Kong
alone.
Tell me would the design change if a larger stone were used or
perhaps a different stone? Tiffany has a cigar band ring that is
copyrighted but so do other manufacturers. Just a different
emblem on the face qualifies a change.
You have a difficult problem, I don’t have a solution.
Copyright doesn’t seem to be the solution but I could be wrong.
The FTC guidelines as I’ve read them are not real clear on this.
But common sense suggests that since the intent of those rules
is to make it clear what a piece is, then if the seperate metals
are clearly visible as seperate metals, then stamping the piece
with both marks only increases the understanding of the
consumer/reader as to what they are seeing, rather than being
deceptive. For the wholesale line my emplyer makes, we routinely
have pieces that combine 18K and platinum, for example, and these
pieces get both marks. A reader should have no trouble
ascertaining that the yellow metal is not the platinum…
And I’ve seen work from several moderately large manufacturers
that combine metals in this way, or with sterling and gold…
Same sort of common sense reasoning seems to apply…
Peter Rowe
I too have been reading with interest the discussion on US
hallmarking rules. I have to agree with Richard that the UK
system works well and guarantees the quality of the metal to
customers - workmanship is a different matter. As a recent
entrant to the metal arts ( I have been a lapidary for many
years) I found the system easy to adopt and my customers
appreciate the value of the mark - heck they will ask ‘is it
hallmarked’ so I now habitually have everything assayed even if
below the weight limit (7.9g for Sterling). It was a real buzz
when my sponsors mark was approved and the stamps arrived - I got
lots of practice with them you can be sure! A Dutch friend who is
a gemmologist, jeweller and generally thoroughly talented did
complain, light heartedly I think, that all I had to do was send
off 40UKP and it took her 6 years of studying to gat a mark. I
wasn’t aware that the EEC was trying to wreck that as well - oh
well better start learning Esperanto I suspect. Andy Parker, Agate
House Lapidary Ulverston, Cumbria, England