Clorox Xtra blue

Jump to latest Follow Reply
N

nlindelldc

0
LifeTime Supporter
Mar 21, 2015
440
Corpus Christi, Texas
So in my haste one day I bought a bucket of Clorox Xtra Blue 3" chlorinating tablets because they were on sale and I figured I could use them while on vacation.

I have put them in my inline chlorinator but just yesterday I discovered that they have some "extra ingredients", someone suggested Copper or other heavy metals. According to the MSDS sheet (link posted below), there are some "trade secret" ingredients, 3-8%. How is it possible that they aren't mandated to tell you what that is?!?!? What am I missing?

http://www.homedepot.com/catalog/pdfImages/d8/d8689e50-4255-40d9-9c49-175020f26df7.pdf
 
The boron salt is probably borax to offset the acidity of the trichlor. The trade secret could be a copper metal salt.

MSDS reporting requirements are covered under Federal law. Businesses that use a proprietary chemical which they deem as "trade secret" are exempt from reporting the name of the compound to protect a business secret. They must report the physical, chemical and biological properties of the compound but they are not forced to disclose a name. Should there be an accidental exposure to a human, hospitals and physicians as well as hazmat personnel can inquire what the compound is so as to initiate treatment but they are barred from disclosing it to the public.

My suggestion, unfortunately, is to not use those tablets. Return them or sell them to a friend. But don't use them.
 
Wow, that is shocking to me. I never would have thought they could purposefully keep something like that a secret. Maybe I should feign an ingestion poisoning (kidding of course).

Who would knowingly put Copper in their tablets? Seems irresponsible to me. After I ditched my Nature 2 system (thanks to this site), I thought my metal worries were over with!
 
Copper metal salts are algaecides. Many of the tablet manufacturers have "4-in-1" type tablet products. Makes them sound fancy.

As for MSDS reporting requirements, it's a balance of interests. Businesses have a legitimate right to sell products and protect their trade secrets. If I build a super special widget that everyone wants to buy is it legitimate to expect me to divulge every aspect of the product that I spent years of time and research money developing only to have my neighbor read an MSDS and start making his own widget? I don't think so.

But the public has a legitimate interest in product safety and so the MSDS reporting requirements are a balance between that and business's legitimate right to make and sell a product.
 
JoyfulNoise said:
...

As for MSDS reporting requirements, it's a balance of interests. Businesses have a legitimate right to sell products and protect their trade secrets. If I build a super special widget that everyone wants to buy is it legitimate to expect me to divulge every aspect of the product that I spent years of time and research money developing only to have my neighbor read an MSDS and start making his own widget? I don't think so. ...QUOTE]

You've obviously never filed a patent! You must fully describe your invention and include detailed drawings. But, yes, chemical compounds are handled differently.
Click to expand...
 
Griswald said:
You've obviously never filed a patent! You must fully describe your invention and include detailed drawings. But, yes, chemical compounds are handled differently.
Click to expand...

I actually have 24 patents on which I am either the principal inventor or one of the inventors. So I am actually quite familiar with patents and patent law. I have also been part of patent infringement investigations and have filed legal briefs on cases of infringement. Patents, and the disclosures therein, are protected from infringement by US Patent laws. The holder of a patent can easily sue for infringement and not only stop a competitor from using intellectual property that doesn't belong to them but also receive huge damage awards in the process (see Apple versus Samsung).

Trade secrets are a completely different concept. Trade-secrets are NOT protected under patent law nor are they considered intellectual property. So, once a trade secret is divulged, anyone can use it.

The simplified concept is this - if "A" is not novel and "B" is not novel, then "A+B" is not novel either and you can not claim a patent right to "A+B". However, you can keep a formulation of "A+B" secret and are not legally required to divulge that trade secret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lucasaltic
As I understand it from a Haviland rep, when it comes to pool chemicals they are allowed to claim "trade secret" as long as they don't claim it kills anything. His example was ProTeam Supreme and Supreme PLUS. These are both borate products, the regular Supreme has a high pH so you must add acid with it while PLUS is pH neutral. If you look on their product pages you will see that Supreme lists "Algae is less likely to form in pool water" under Benefits. You can also see on the MSDS and the picture of the bucket shows it lists the ingredients: sodium tetraborate pentahydrate. Now the PLUS does not list anything about algae it the Benefits, nor does it have anything listed anywhere on a bucket of the stuff and the MSDS states Trade Secret. They are both borate products and we know that borates inhibit algae growth, but they chose not to advertise that in order to keep the exact formula to themselves.

Also, Yippee is right, anything that has "Blue" in the name likely contains copper. Unless there is an ingredient list showing otherwise you will want to avoid it.
 
JoyfulNoise said:
I actually have 24 patents on which I am either the principal inventor or one of the inventors. So I am actually quite familiar with patents and patent law. I have also been part of patent infringement investigations and have filed legal briefs on cases of infringement. Patents, and the disclosures therein, are protected from infringement by US Patent laws. The holder of a patent can easily sue for infringement and not only stop a competitor from using intellectual property that doesn't belong to them but also receive huge damage awards in the process (see Apple versus Samsung).

Trade secrets are a completely different concept. Trade-secrets are NOT protected under patent law nor are they considered intellectual property. So, once a trade secret is divulged, anyone can use it.

The simplified concept is this - if "A" is not novel and "B" is not novel, then "A+B" is not novel either and you can not claim a patent right to "A+B". However, you can keep a formulation of "A+B" secret and are not legally required to divulge that trade secret.
Click to expand...

Impressive, Ive got 12 patents and 2 design patents. All of them are simply to keep our competition from doing what we are. We also never collect money for infringement, we just make them stop building the product.
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
YippeeSkippy said:
Anytime the name includes "blue" it seems to imply copper is included. I agree that it should be included in the ingredient list.

Sadly, many people don't know how copper can mess up their water and pool. :(
Click to expand...

Many years ago I learned the hard, and expensive way. :mad:
 
Griswald said:
Impressive, Ive got 12 patents and 2 design patents. All of them are simply to keep our competition from doing what we are. We also never collect money for infringement, we just make them stop building the product.
Click to expand...

Patents and keeping things as "trade secrets" are both ways of protecting intellectual property. When you apply for a patent, you explain in fine detail everything your product does, but you get a monopoly on your invention for a specified period of time. When you choose to keep something as a trade secret, you want to provide as little detail as possible. However, there is no predefined expiration date on a trade secret like there is on a patent.

When companies make chemicals, from a regulatory standpoint they only need to provide enough information to inform how the material should be transported, how it should be disposed of, and how it should be handled should something unexpected (e.g. carrier truck crash, fire, exposure to elements, etc.) happen to it. When there is an incident, first responders don't care about the individual ingredients in something....they only want to know how to deal with it. (FYI, this is why some things you might purchase only cause cancer in the state of California!) This is how companies can keep various things "hidden" from common disclosure. If this Chlorox Blue has copper in it and the copper creates no additional hazard/storage/disposal consequences, then they don't necessarily need to state that anywhere.

US (and essentially every other country) legislates that this documentation (Safety Data Sheet) exist for every chemical compound that is introduced or created at a given location. Even water has one....Google "MSDS water" if you want to see an example.
 

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply