THE TEST
A sample is assayed
Fineness is measured accurately — on a sample, not on the whole object.
Patented
Proving the piece,
not just the purity.
A hallmark proves a test was done. It does not prove that this object is the one that was tested.
2019Granted
2038In force to
7System claims
Gold · SilverBars and coins too
The gap
Every hallmark proves a test.
None proves the piece.
THE MARK
A short code is engraved
A few characters in a registry. No weight. No image of this article.
?
Is this that piece?
At that weight? No retailer, customer, lender or insurer can answer from the mark alone.
Gold is priced by the gram. Exchange, buyback, repair, lending and insurance all turn on proving that the article in hand is the article that was recorded — and all of them face more scrutiny every year.
The system
A closed loop, furnace to counter.
One record per article — taken from the machines, not typed in afterwards.
Because the code retires at the point of sale, a harvested code reprinted onto a counterfeit is already a dead code.
Machine-sourced
Auditable back to a measurement, not to someone's data entry.
Image-bound
Photographed at marking, comparable later. Substitution shows up.
Single-use
Retired on sale — defeats harvest-and-reprint counterfeiting.
Owned to 2038
A granted patent, not a claim a rival can announce next quarter.
What travels with the article
Five facts, welded to one object.
The record
- Weight, before and after assay
- Timestamp of manufacture
- Composition
- Assay result
- Image, captured at marking
The code is derived from these — not allocated from a sequence — so it cannot exist without a real measurement behind it.
What it adds
Sits on top of hallmarking.
Does not replace it.
| Statutory hallmarking | This system | |
|---|---|---|
| Assayed to a declared fineness | Yes | Yes |
| Jeweller and centre identified | Yes | Yes |
| Bound to this article's weight | No | Yes |
| Image captured and comparable | No | Yes |
| Drawn straight from the machines | No | Yes |
| Weight before and after assay | No | Yes |
| Retired once the article is sold | No | Yes |
| Checked by the customer's own phone | Partly | Yes |
Compliance stays with the statutory scheme. Proof of the piece becomes yours.
Where it pays
Four places the record earns its keep.
Exchange and buyback
Is this the piece we sold, at that weight? A lookup, not an argument.
Manufacturing control
Process loss measured at every article, not estimated at month end.
Bars and coins
A serial derived from the assay record, verified from a phone.
A position rivals can't copy
Trust claims are easy to imitate. A granted patent is not.
Downstream demand
You create the record.
Everyone after you relies on it.
From 1 April 2026, RBI's Lending Against Gold and Silver Collateral Directions require every lender to certify purity, gross and net weight, deductions, defects and an image for each pledge. Those are largely the fields this system already captures at manufacture — though valuation and the lending decision stay entirely the lender's own. Read the RBI directions.
The asset
A granted Indian patent.
Claim 1
The core
Machine data in → code and weight marked on the article → verified later from a user's device.
Claims 2–5
Weight and image
Weight before and after assay. Image captured at marking and compared at verification.
Claims 6–7
Retirement
The code is terminated once the article is sold. The claims also define the machines that feed the record.
| Title | A System and a Method of Authenticating Testing of Articles |
|---|---|
| Patentee | Fanfire Solutions LLP |
| Jurisdiction | India |
| “Article” | Not limited to jewellery — gold, silver, bars, coins and other tested articles |
Ownership
Own it, don't rent it.
Offered for outright assignment — with the architecture, technical documentation and inventor-team transition.
- Exclusive — a licence can go to a rival next quarter
- Group-wide — retail, manufacturing, refining, lending
- On your balance sheet as an identifiable intangible
- No royalties to meter, report or dispute
How it runs: mutual NDA → technical discussion → diligence pack with a claim-fit memo against your own workflow → indicative offer. Commercial terms come after technical fit, not before.
Worth a conversation?
If article-level proof would change how your manufacturing, retail or lending operation works, contact us for a confidential discussion of the claims and technical documentation.