Professional Brand Protection Becoming More and More Important

The globalization of markets demands ever greater vigilance to combat brand piracy which is currently responsible for losses of around 30 billion euros in Germany and is estimated to amount to some 300 billion euros worldwide every year. To establish a brand with intensive marketing and then let the pirates take it would be suicidal. Which is why brand protection strategies are becoming ever more important.

Effective brand protection strategy needs to cover the entire product life cycle which includes product development and design and in many cases global logistics. This is where packaging plays a major role. Brand protection is vital for the owner who has invested a lot of time and money in establishing it, and consumers associate it with a certain image and quality. Pirates are constantly seeking to copy successful brands and products and share in the success without sharing in the investment. The problem is well known: every day newspapers report on massive brand abuse and forgeries. MAN Roland has been playing close attention to this volatile topic for quite some time now. 
 
Together with members and partners of the PrintCity alliance, sample folding boxes have been developed that demonstrate modern brand protection technologies. These include among other things fluorescent UV inks that permit a security element or logo to be seen under UV light using a special magnifier decoder. IR-Upcode inks are also used that generate a visual signal under infrared light of a defined wavelength. Holograms like Trustseal® from the Kurz company also offer a high degree of security. 

Packaging’s important role in brand protection

When designing a packaging solution for brand protection purposes the requirements of other process stages need to be considered and their purposes must be properly understood. Here the development of packaging is an integral component of a brand protection strategy. An ideal security concept covers all stages of the production process from manufacturing, packaging and logistics right through to distribution to the enduser. Such a concept requires security features for different security levels. The level intended for the consumer enables one to see at a glance whether the product is an original or not – for example with holograms and embossing. Unfortunately such security features are often forged because product pirates believe the costs involved are acceptable. However, through a cleverly selected combination of process steps which can be done inline, the number of forgeries can be reduced considerably. 
 
When additional aids are needed to detect security features this is the level for distributors and logistics partners. Copyright features can be detected by instruments or decoding devices. Such security features are only visible under special UV light or with special filter lenses. When features are only recognizable or decipherable with special instruments this is the level for the brand owner and they can be used as proof of product piracy in a lawsuit. One example here is DNA-laced printing ink or coating with forensic features that can only be identified in a special laboratory. 

Communication along the value-adding chain

Starting from the second security level at the latest, communication along the value-adding chain becomes very complex. In most cases with the classic brand protection process the brand owner must be called upon for product verification. Alternatively he or she must see that the checking institutions (customs, police, trade supervisors) are provided with the necessary identification instruments. And this is where the practical problems start. Due to the number of different methods, the verifiers are confronted with a potentially vast array of instruments each of which requires knowledge of how to use them. Customs officers for instance don’t always know where the security features are concealed. And special instruments such as an IR-laser pointer require a certain wavelength that is seldom available at a verifier’s site. As a result thorough examination, often under extreme time pressure, is not feasible.
 
The number of special printing inks is good for protection against piracy but problematical for verification and checking. These security features are certainly valuable in a lawsuit but one must always look at the cost/benefit aspects because these special inks are often very expensive. Besides the costs for the inks one must often also consider the costs for an additional printing unit as well as the costs for the verification instruments. In an ideal case the protection factor of the inks should be combined with another design aspect so that the costs can be somewhat justified. 

Expensive measures only taken when worthwhile

Market surveys have shown that product protection measures with high variable costs are only taken in certain cases: either when the high value of a product would make piracy an especially serious matter or when relevant legal protection exists. The decisive factors in all cases are the economics and the possibility of integrating product protection measures in the production process as such. Because of tough competition, many brand owners keep the costs for product protection as low as possible. Some also try to get packaging manufacturers to bear the costs, and this is a challenge for the creativity of the printing industry.

What properties does an ideal security feature have?

• Simple communication along all stages of the product life cycle  
• Verification instrument uniformity
• Simple and unmistakeable identification
• Effective protection (the feature must be difficult and expensive to copy)
• Individual applications / displayed on the product and its packaging
• Logistics functions to be included
• Lowest possible unit cost (a matter of cents)

The human eye – an identification instrument that’s always available

The eye is an identification instrument that’s always available everywhere. However, visually recognisable security features are also immediately identifiable by a counterfeiter and so they must be of a quality that discourages attempts to copy them. There’s no such thing as absolute protection and so static security features must always have new combinations that make it very difficult and expensive to copy them. The objective of these combinations is to stay one step ahead of the counterfeiter. Regular updates and modifications to the combination of features is the only way to make the cost of copying them so high that it is not worthwhile. 
 
Compared to combinations, singular and non-combinable security features are much less effective. Solutions already integrated in the packaging printing process are economical and generally have a greater security effect than features added at other stages of packaging production. As a rule features added inline in one pass in a printing press are very hard to imitate without using similar equipment. Besides their primary role as brand protection, the design of most security features is also intended to enhance the value of the packaging in the eye of the consumer. As a result inline production not only offers economic and design advantages but also a high level of protection against brand piracy. This is yet one more reason why MAN Roland will resolutely continue to follow the inline strategy i.e. integrating more and more enhancement steps in the printing process.

Cold foil application to prevent forgery

MAN Roland printing systems equipped with the InlineFoiler Prindor offer virtually forgery-proof features produced inline. Here the adhesive ink for cold foil enhancement is applied by a normal offset plate which ensures optimal print register. Compared with offline hot-foil embossing which cannot provide the same precise register, this makes copying of security features much more difficult. Besides that the cold foil lies flat on the substrate and can be overprinted and the combination of foil and printing generates features that are very hard to copy. 
 
Furthermore, the foil can be overprinted with special design elements or individualised with micro-embossing. The cost of copying this without similar equipment is prohibitive. These special design elements can be added in prepress as image information such as coded images, screen dot modifications, modulated screen rulings, nanotext or guilloché patterns. Such static features are mostly very inexpensive because there are only one-time costs for the prepress work and printing costs are not increased since the features can be printed inline in a normal printing unit. By using structured foil like a hologram foil for instance combined with overprinting the risk of forgery can be reduced even further. 
 
As an option MAN Roland offers special reinforced cylinder structure embossing. This embossing can be done prior to printing and then overprinted but embossing after printing – possibly combined with cold foil transfer – can increase the complexity of the feature so much that it would be enormously expensive to copy. Structure or detail embossing however requires hardened UV ink to prevent the ink smearing on the embossing die. Embossing need not always be deep or relief; a slight surface structure embossing perhaps with modified stochastic screen patterns can be a good alternative. Since register is not an issue here there are hardly any makeready time costs, and the costs for the embossing dies are also reasonable. The random interaction with the printed image provides an individual structure. 
 
MAN Roland will be reporting further about brand protection in the packaging sector.