Talk:SmartWater

message: 78.33.55.130 has has left the following comment in the article sentence "... Phil Cleary, a retired senior police detective and CEO of SmartWater Ltd, ..." after the word "senior":
:[Note to Author: Sorry, I wish, only made Sergeant but thanks anyway! Phil Cleary]
(Please note that there is no way for other Wikipedians to verify that this comment was indeed made by the named person. But I am going to assume that it was.)
The "senior" is a direct quote from the cited source, the 2005 Wired article :
:SmartWater CEO Phil Cleary, a retired senior detective, hit upon the idea after watching burglars he had apprehended walk free from court due to lack of evidence.
Usually Wired magazine is considered a reasonably reliable source. But since the fact in question is not very important in the context of this Wikipedia article, I am just going to remove it. 
Hi, I think the confusion came about because I'd passed my exams for senior officer rank and even 'acted up' on occasion but a traffic accident put an end to my police career so, in the interests of accuracy, I never actually made it to senior officer rank. Having said that, some would argue that Sergeants actually run the police service which, of course, I couldn't comment on :)PhilClea (talk) 09:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "retired senior detective" 

message: I have tagged this article as needing the attention of an expert, it is lacking any detail on how this stuff really works. --UltraMagnus (talk) 16:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert Tagging 

message: Not sure if any of this is worth placing within the article : 
Clearly, complications arise when Smartwater labelled items are transacted (say at trade stores, such as CeX) - for how would the store distinguish between a legally transacted item, and an illegally sold item IF its record keeping activities were not of a high enough standard? (of course, ID presentation at the time of an item being sold by a reduces the chances of an illegally sold item - if CeX were to keep long term records).  
In particular, somebody found with a smartwater labelled item that has been recorded under someone else's smartwater record is not necessarily guilty of theft if the item was legally sold to them.  It is clearly possible that a wrongful conviction could ensue IF receipts were lost and police wrongfully believed that an item had been stolen when it had not been.  The fact that smartwater is invisible compounds the problem, as one can buy an item not knowing that it is labelled with smartwater.  A possible consequence of these observations is that individuals may be reluctant to buy smartwater marked items if they know that an item is marked with smartwater - one should be aware of the possibility that marking an item with smartwater could permanently result in the item remaining the property of the person marking the item (or whoever else is registered with the smartwater database) - that is, the item might be difficult to sell on.  For high value items, it is not known whether Smartwater can unmark the items so that they can be sold to a new seller who is aware of the risks associated with transaction of smartwater marked items.    
 
It is also wise to mark items with Smartwater as soon as the smartwater is received, so that there is no difference between the time that smartwater is registered with the Smartwater database AND when it has been applied (though, because of the Smartwater Use By Date, it is possible that someone could apply Smartwater to their property Long after having received the Smartwater).  
ASavantDude (talk) 12:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Abuse of Smartwater

message: This article is supposedly about SmartWater. But most of its content is praise for the company that makes it and for the guys who developed it - there's suspiciously little useful information about how it actually works. The reader (this one, anyway) is left wondering if it's all bullshit – these clever guys sell tapwater, the householder uses it as instructed and puts up a sign as shown in the article, and the cautious burglar sees the sign and moves on to the next house. Maproom (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article should say more about its subject