The press has been filled with stories about counterfeit wine in the past few months. Any solution for absolute authentication needs to start with the wine producer for obvious reasons. But for a solution to be workable for the trade and consumers, a simple method for them to verify the wine's authenticity is needed. A security seal called Prooftag (adopted by Blankiet Estates and some Burgundy/Bordeaux producers) meets this test whereas Kodak's offering (adopted by Colgin, Vineyard 29 and Staglin, see press release) does not.
Overview of Prooftag technology
Prooftag is tamper-evident strip (about 1 cm wide and 5 cms long) which is applied to run from the foil capsule onto the bottle. The technology works on a three dimensional signature called bubble tags that are made from a clear resin which create bubbles in unique (random) patterns during a hardening process. Read more about why these tags are impossible to reproduce.
Tags also have a unique number assigned and both are then scanned with optical readers when created (by the manufacturer, French company Novatec) and recorded in a central database.
The key advantage of Prooftag - Easy verification
There are 3 levels of "controls" to verify tags. The first level is based on a quick visual inspection. See example to right where the top image is an original strip and the lower one has been tampered with. The strip might also be ripped.
The second level of control requires using the identifier on the tag to retrieve the unique bubble pattern image from the company's database. Simply visit this authentication page, and enter the identifier (click here for the animated tutorial). According to the company, over 99.95% of people tested can complete a visual authentication in a few seconds.
For the trade, optical readers that use an algorithm to calculate a signature for each bubble tag (analogous to how fingerprint readers work) can then be connected to the company portal for electronic authentication.
Possible issues with Prooftag's solution
I presume simply peeling off the strip (even if it remained unripped) would create the damage shown in the second image above (although I didn't see this scenario proactively addressed on the company site).
What about the long-term "stickiness" of the label in varying cellar conditions? If for some reason the Prooftag came off accidentally, it could render the bottle valueless. It seems likely this use case has also been considered.
Potential flaws in Kodak solution?
Kodak's system is based on applying invisible markers to printing inks, paper, and other packaging elements. But these invisible markers are only readable with proprietary handheld readers. Putting aside the low probability of an individual collector ever buying a reader, trade members might still do so if they care about selling authentic bottles. The problem is when Vinfolio inquired about obtaining a reader for this purpose, we were told that they're available only to customers! Huh? This virtually defeats the benefit of marking the bottles at all.
The other obvious flaw with the entire Kodak approach is that it does nothing to stop a counterfeiter from refilling a bottle with something else (unless the markers are in the foil capsule and it is not resused after a bottle contents are replaced).
Bottom line: Wine producers deciding between these and other anti-counterfeiting options need to consider how the trade and consumers will interact with the technology.
P.S. Here's a link to the Decanter.com article which prompted this post.
