Sounds like a variant of the "Evercolor pigment print process" that had a brief moment in digital printmaking history back in the 1990s in the sense that the pigmented gelatin layers were being transferred and bonded to a polyester (PET) base unlike historical carbon pigment processes that used a paper support. Charles Berger also offered a carbon color print process called "Ultrastable" but I seem to recall the Ultrastable gelatin layers were transferred to a paper support rather than PET with the Ultrastable print process (my memory may be faulty on that score). Anyway, the use of a polyester base provides a high physical dimensional stability that helps make the color channel registration process work well, but it also becomes the achilles heel down the road in terms of fragility of the print to cracking/delamination. Great care must be taken with these relatively thick gelatin pigment layers on polyester base (i.e., thicker than Iflochrome aka Cibachrome emulsions on PET base) to keep humidity cycling to a minimum, i.e. no high (>60%RH) to low (<35%RH) transitions otherwise high mechanical stress levels in the gelatin layers occurring in the high to low RH transition will literally crack and delaminate them from the hydrophilic polyester layer in relatively few harsh seasonal summer/winter humidity cycles common in cold northern climates.
As you also are probably well aware of by now, pigment colorants are generally more stabile than dye-based colorants, but some pigments are clearly much more stable than others (e.g., Van Gogh's choice of chromium yellow has deteriorated significantly from a bright yellow to an ochre yellow over time, Epson's pigmented yellow is also a significantly weak link in the Ultrachrome ink set family, K3, K3VM, HDR, and ConeColor pigment sets have a weak magenta pigment). So, with respect to overall light fade resistance in comparison to other modern digital print processes, this carbon pigment process would need to be fade tested. I don't see any indication on the website that any such testing was ever performed. Which means the assumption is that the print is light fast simply because it's pigment rather than dye, but the devil is always in the details.
best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com