>- Company uses different recipe in current factory using current tooling, product is substantially different. The product has ingredients, the product gets a

>- Company uses different recipe in current factory using current tooling, product is substantially different. The product has ingredients, the product gets a label, the product label links to the ingredients; each ingredient had a label, that tree of labels links back ... this already happens, when an ingredient (which child itself be a product) is found to be inferior or spoiled the manufacturer can check their own products made with that batch of ingredient. 'All' we would be doing is exposing this data. Change suppliers, there code on the product changes (that could be by keeping a table of product UUID matched to batch number). Someone mixed peanuts in with the macadamia nuts and supplied 100 different manufacturers, now the public can look up those products that were affected just as much as the suppliers can. Someone bought a cheaper metal, for their bicycle frames, that shows in the product information linked from the origin mark. Someone changed the recipe of their chocolate bar to have more filler ingredients ... that should already show on the ingredients list. A company change their GPU, say, to use slower RAM, that shows in the product info as an ingredient. Binning? Not much help for that. Different manufacturer or different factory, that would show. It would expose a lot of information considered currently try to hide. Doesn't really do anything for fraud except that if you claim someone is your supplier (still) and financials don't show continuing payments then it's clear there is fraud there. Any further thoughts, very happy to discuss. I'm keen to work this up into a feasible system. pbhj AT alicious , com