The questions that come up most.

Software for beauty brand owners, cosmetic manufacturers and safety assessors. The apps carry the regulatory and technical work that sits around a cosmetic. Two are open today. LabelCheck reads the label against the law before the artwork goes to print. ExpertDesk takes the regulatory question you would put to a colleague who happened to know that exact part. After them come PIFBuilder, for the product information file, and FormulaArchive, for finding a formula you already own the moment a client asks for it. What is inside them is Claudio Nicodemo’s 30 years in the hair and beauty sector. Those years cover the chain one trade at a time: hairdresser at fifteen, technical trainer for international brands, then distribution and wholesale across Europe. Private label sits at the end of that list, and it belongs there: it draws on all of them at once.

No. cosmetiFULL builds software and nothing else: the plants, the products, the packaging and the ingredients in this trade all belong to other companies. That matters in two different ways. If you put your name on a cosmetic, an answer here is about your product and not about somebody’s stock, which is also why the guides say plainly when a decision is a bad one. If you manufacture for other brands, we are not a competitor sitting inside your accounts: your clients stay yours, and what the software reads is the work you already do.

LabelCheck, ExpertDesk and the 73 guides. LabelCheck reads a cosmetic label against the European rules, and against the British ones when Great Britain is among your markets, then gives you back every point that needs attention, each one next to the article it comes from. ExpertDesk takes the regulatory question you would put to a colleague who happened to know that exact part, and there are 15 of them, one per job. Getting an account takes one email: a person opens it for you, and from then on you have someone to write to when one of the points does not add up. The guides are published in full and set out the order the decisions have to be taken in, which is the part that settles the outcome long before the product exists.

You check it against the law, point by point. Every point carries the rule it rests on, and the article of Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009, or of the act that amended it, whenever that rule has one, so you can open the law and read the sentence for yourself. The rules behind the check are anchored to the official consolidated text, not to somebody’s summary of it, and when the law moves, the change is dated and published. The regulation has the last word, and it is the same text read by whoever comes to check.

No. The responsible person named on the pack carries the legal responsibility for the product, and the safety assessor signs the safety report. Software cannot hold either role. What it does is find, in a fraction of the time, the things a person would find by reading the same label slowly, or that would otherwise turn up after the print run. The responsibility stays where the law puts it, and the software works for the people who carry it.

The label text produces the report and is not kept: what stays in your account is the report itself, with every point and the article behind it, and it stays there until you delete it. Beyond that, a set of counts is kept: how often each kind of labelling issue comes up, and in which markets. Those counts are numbers and nothing more, and the label text, the name you gave the analysis and who you are stay out of them. How long the report and the counts are kept, and how they are protected, is set out on the LabelCheck privacy and security pages.

Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 assigns the role by three routes, and which one applies to you depends on how the product reaches the market. For a cosmetic made in the Union, the responsible person is the manufacturer established in the Union, unless the manufacturer designates someone else by written mandate that the other party accepts in writing. For an imported cosmetic, it is the importer, who can move it the same way. And a distributor becomes the responsible person by placing the product under their own name or trademark, or by modifying a product already on the market in such a way that compliance with the applicable requirements may be affected: translating the information that comes with such a product does not count as that kind of modification. So a brand that has a European manufacturer produce for it is not automatically the responsible person: the role travels on paper, and settling which route you are on is the first thing to put in writing with your manufacturer.

LabelCheck is open to you today and it works on the labels you produce for your clients, as well as on the ones for your own line: reading the label against the rules line by line, the job that keeps one of your people busy today, is the first job it takes off your desk. Every brand you produce for goes through the same check, so what you hand the client is complete every time, whoever prepared it. And you cover more products with the people you already have. ExpertDesk is open to you as well, for the regulatory question that comes up in the middle of a job.

Yes. LabelCheck reads your label against the European rules and, when Great Britain is one of your markets, against the British ones as well, including its own allergen list. Northern Ireland follows the European rules and is handled that way. On the notification side the same split holds: CPNP for the European Union and Northern Ireland, SCPN for Great Britain, and before you notify you can check whether the product is ready for the portal that applies to you.

Yes, and it is the honest way to judge this. Take a label you are working on right now, paste it in, and read what comes back: every point that needs attention, with the article of law behind it. A label you already know well will tell you more in five minutes than any description of the product can. Getting an account takes one email, a person opens it for you, and from then on you have someone to write to when a point does not add up.