Issue Of Postage Stamp Security

Of course, I can understand how security features would be desirable on money. Also I can see a need for them on postage stamps. However, I do not see an effective method of detecting a counterfeited postage stamp.

I will use microprinting as an example since it's been recently discussed here. The USPS applies tiny markings to stamps as an attempt to prevent counterfeiting. Yet, nobody is going to look for or see these tiny marks in the method of processing a letter. Therefore no fake stamp will be detected and no counterfeiter will be caught.

So why doesn't the USPS use a more effective method of detecting a counterfeited stamp? The easiest method would be to have something on the stamp that would be detected by the same machine that does the sorting. If the taggant is not detected, or the "something" is not detected, then the letter is kicked out of the system and the stamp is not cancelled. Therefore foiling the counterfeiter.

It might be interesting for collectors to locate microprinting on stamps, but as an anti-counterfeiting measure it is useless.

So why is the USPS doing it?

Here is the interesting article that got me all excited...

http://www.linns.com/howto/refreshe...rcourse.aspx


-IBFS

That Linn's article dates back to 2000, so it is some 14 years old and certainly some modern equipment has been installed since then that helps the USPS thwart counterfeiting.

Microprinting is only one means of doing this. Security printing (i.e. special inks) also is part of the routine. So is the die cutting used on most self adhesive stamps. The other is tagging on the stamps which the mailing machines can "see" and ultimately spit out those that do not meet established criteria for postal inspectors to look at. When meters are in use, there are special inks used for the metered postage and the IBI portion of the indicia can be read to verify its authenticity.

More often than not, an odd envelope will get through the process (after all, it doesn't pay to go after those trying to get away without paying their 49-cents first class postage). It would not be worth the USPS's time and effort to go after every illegal postage user if one or two pieces of mail are suspect; likewise it wouldn't pay a would-be criminal to bother with such small items either.

I suspect that most scrutiny is given to large volumes of mail and those coming from mailing houses to be certain the postage applied is legitimate.

I'm sure the USPS (probably the US Postal Inspection Service) has a number of other means to track down illegal postage users and I assume they don't publicize such details for obvious reasons.

So they use special inks. Now that makes sense. And I'm assuming the microprints use them as well.

How did they prevent counterfeiting on "classic" stamps? Surely the hand sorters didn't take the time to look for those secret marks, and wouldn't have been able to look for watermarks.


-IBFS

Micro-printing, a largely covert process (i.e. not 'obviously' there, as you say, for it is an "after the event" feature), serves to help prove that those stamps without it (or with a blurred non-genuine equivalent) are counterfeit when a person or gang come for trial, thus helping to convict them. A juror could easily decide on the genuineness, or otherwise, of seized stock when told "with it - genuine, without it or blurry -counterfeit". Micro-printing is usually* done without special inks and tends to be incorporated into the basic CMYK colour separations on a stamp. It is a pre-press feature that is software-generated.

*In my country (UK), micro-printing (or rather 'small printing', for it is readable with naked eye) is now used on our definitive stamps as a separate top layer in a special colourless ink with repeat wording (such as Royal Mail) and special codes to identify the format of the stamp and the printer). Counterfeiters are already incorporating this feature in their version of the stamp, but not in the right ink.

GLENN