On 10/28/2005 11:27:20 AM, jklewis [at] nettally.com wrote:
> Mike Bennett wrote:
>> I agree there is a lot of secrecy about Superthrive, but there is a
>> lot of secrecy about many products, it's called proprietary
>> information. Give that away, everyone goes off and makes it and you
>> lose your market. It's common practice among many companies.
>
> It seems to be more than that. It's apparent refusal to submit for
> govt. labeling requirements. Patents would cover the ingredients
> list.
Quibble: Patents demand disclosure. But it's not likely that they would
be able to get a patent on it, anyway. Formulations aren't usually given
patent protection.
Keeping the formula secret is exactly what Coke and Pepsi have done. For
the same ostensible reason. Anyone who wants to can have anything tested
and try to duplicate it if it isn't protected. Of course, any processes
involved in making it -whatever it is - wouldn't be discernible from the
ingredients alone.
Whether it's snake oil or not, I don't know. But if I were making
something that could be easily duplicable with standard ingredients, I
wouldn't tell anyone, either. I don't think I'd ascribe sinister motives
to the people who make Superthrive from their secrecy. Seems like good
business security to me. But you never can tell...
Pastorio
************************************************************ ********************
++++Sponsored, in part, by John Romano++++
************************************************************ ********************
>>-->> The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ <<--<<
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail BONSAI-REQUEST [at] HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM +++++
