In the 1930s,
Chester Carlson, the inventor of the
photocopier, began his research into what came to be called Xerography. Having made good progress by the early 1940s, he began looking for investors, approaching many office supplies companies including IBM. IBM reportedly rejected his proposal because they felt that carbon paper was a cheaper alternative. IBM hired consulting firm
Arthur D. Little to assess the technology, but that assessment was negative, so IBM did not invest in the product. Haloid invested heavily and launched the Xerox 914 in 1959. By 1961 Haloid (now renamed to Xerox) was making $66m USD in revenue and in 1965 their revenues were over $500m USD. In 1970 Xerox held 70% of what was then a one billion dollar (USD) Global copier market. Meanwhile, in 1965
George Castro (PhD), authored a doctoral thesis at Dartmouth College that demonstrated that organic materials could conduct electricity when exposed to light. At that time this was a significant scientific achievement and led to an opportunity to conduct more research in this area at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena in 1967. IBM hired him as a Research Staff Member in 1968 to help in the development of Organic PhotoConductors, a project he came to manage and which was key to IBM's development of both the Copier I and the IBM 3800.) and to let them use plain paper in their Copiers. An IBM Think Magazine article written in May 1975 described the development of the organic photoconductor as one of the Research Divisions
"prime achievement in the noncomputer field". While George Castro has been referred to as the
inventor of the IBM Copier, it was Shattuck and Vahtra who were specifically mentioned in IBMs legal battles with Xerox around patents. Another difference that IBM achieved was developing a dry hot roll that did not require silicone oil to fuse the toner onto paper without the toner sticking to the roll. The two lawsuits were consolidated, but remained in pre-trial stage. In November 1975 IBM counter-sued Xerox for infringing an IBM Patent. Their various lawsuits were finally settled in 1978 by an exchange of patents and a payment by IBM to Xerox of US$25 million. IBMs market share of the worldwide copier market in 1975 was 5%. By 1977 it was reportedly as high as 10%. By 1980 it was 4% and by 1985 it was only 3%. There were three significant product releases in the IBM Copier family: The IBM Copier, the IBM Copier II and the IBM Series III Copier. == IBM Copier ==