I’m a little late on this, but it turns out that Diamond Nexus Labs is suing two Internet forums that have accused the company of selling “nothing but cubic zirconia.”
A company statement claims that “we have endured unfounded attacks on the very make-up of our diamond simulants. These attacks, found on sites like www.yourgemologist.com, www.diamondreview.com, and www.diamond.info assert that our products are nothing but CZ. These assertions are completely false.”
A linked lawsuit (PDF) against yourgemologist explains:
Defendant has falsely asserted that Diamond Nexus Lab does “not have a product laboratory and they do not manufacture any products.”
Defendant has falsely asserted that “the same cubic zirconia that Diamond Nexus sells for over $100.00 can be purchased on eBay for about $5.00.”
Defendant has falsely asserted that Diamond Nexus Labs products are ordinary cubic zirconia and not diamond simulant products made from a variety of materials ….
Plaintiffs’ diamond simulant product had contained and continues to contain additional and differentiating elements from common cubic zirconium. The gemstone is then coated with a proprietary substance that alters the optical and physical properties of the gemstone to make it more exactly match a natural diamonds [sic] properties. Common cubic zirconium has no coating.
Plaintiff’s diamond simulant product, The World’s Most Technologically Advanced Gemstone®, is the near exact optical and physical match to natural mined diamond, it looks identical and wears identically, but the chemistry is different, it is not pure carbon.
Plaintiff’s diamond simulants have been accepted for rating and grading by AIG, American International Gemologists.
The complaint against diamondreview (PDF) contains similar charges, aimed at comments from a member named “m987” on its diamondinfo forum.
Diamond Nexus Labs has been controversial in the industry for a while – here are articles from a few years back from Idex and Rapaport. Its listing on google says it has “the worlds largest selection of flawless lab-created diamond jewelry.” Its site, however, does use the word “simulant.” Will be watching this …
UPDATE: In the comments, and in an email to me, Robert James of yourgemologist.com says the suit against him has been dropped and he was never served. I tried to contact “Diamond Review” last week, but have not heard back, but they are welcome to respond. Not much has happened in their suit since January, according to online court records. I still think this is an interesting suit because it does raise some issues about nomenclature.