Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.
The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.
Diss Factsheets
Use of this information is subject to copyright laws and may require the permission of the owner of the information, as described in the ECHA Legal Notice.
EC number: 416-530-4 | CAS number: 178949-82-1
- Life Cycle description
- Uses advised against
- Endpoint summary
- Appearance / physical state / colour
- Melting point / freezing point
- Boiling point
- Density
- Particle size distribution (Granulometry)
- Vapour pressure
- Partition coefficient
- Water solubility
- Solubility in organic solvents / fat solubility
- Surface tension
- Flash point
- Auto flammability
- Flammability
- Explosiveness
- Oxidising properties
- Oxidation reduction potential
- Stability in organic solvents and identity of relevant degradation products
- Storage stability and reactivity towards container material
- Stability: thermal, sunlight, metals
- pH
- Dissociation constant
- Viscosity
- Additional physico-chemical information
- Additional physico-chemical properties of nanomaterials
- Nanomaterial agglomeration / aggregation
- Nanomaterial crystalline phase
- Nanomaterial crystallite and grain size
- Nanomaterial aspect ratio / shape
- Nanomaterial specific surface area
- Nanomaterial Zeta potential
- Nanomaterial surface chemistry
- Nanomaterial dustiness
- Nanomaterial porosity
- Nanomaterial pour density
- Nanomaterial photocatalytic activity
- Nanomaterial radical formation potential
- Nanomaterial catalytic activity
- Endpoint summary
- Stability
- Biodegradation
- Bioaccumulation
- Transport and distribution
- Environmental data
- Additional information on environmental fate and behaviour
- Ecotoxicological Summary
- Aquatic toxicity
- Endpoint summary
- Short-term toxicity to fish
- Long-term toxicity to fish
- Short-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Long-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Toxicity to aquatic algae and cyanobacteria
- Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Toxicity to microorganisms
- Endocrine disrupter testing in aquatic vertebrates – in vivo
- Toxicity to other aquatic organisms
- Sediment toxicity
- Terrestrial toxicity
- Biological effects monitoring
- Biotransformation and kinetics
- Additional ecotoxological information
- Toxicological Summary
- Toxicokinetics, metabolism and distribution
- Acute Toxicity
- Irritation / corrosion
- Sensitisation
- Repeated dose toxicity
- Genetic toxicity
- Carcinogenicity
- Toxicity to reproduction
- Specific investigations
- Exposure related observations in humans
- Toxic effects on livestock and pets
- Additional toxicological data
Carcinogenicity
Administrative data
Description of key information
No long-term studies assessing the carcinogenic potential of trisodium EDDS, EDDS acid or its other simple salts have been identified.
In good-quality NCI studies, conducted according to a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, trisodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) showed no evidence of carcinogenic potential when fed to rats and mice in the diet for 2 years at up to 7500 ppm (about 375 and 1125 mg/kg bw/day, respectively) (NCI, 1977).
Based on their structural similarity, it is expected that trisodium EDDS is also unlikely to induce tumorigenicity following long-term oral exposure at comparable doses.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Carcinogenicity: via oral route
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- carcinogenicity: oral
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- no data
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 451 (Carcinogenicity Studies)
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- only two doses (three are indicated in guideline) and only 20 controls/sex
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Study conducted for the National Cancer Institute using a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, on related material
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- prior to GLP
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- B6C3F1
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River Breeding Laboratories, Wilmington, Massachusetts, USA
- Age at study initiation: 6 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 19-22 g
- Fasting period before study: no data
- Housing: 5 animals of same sex in polycarbonate cages
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): conventional, ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): "acidulated" water (pH 2.5), ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 14 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 21-25
- Humidity (%): 45-55
- Air changes (per hr): 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 16/8 - Route of administration:
- oral: feed
- Details on exposure:
- DIET PREPARATION
- Rate of preparation of diet (frequency): twice weekly
- Mixing appropriate amounts with (Type of food): meal
- Storage temperature of food: 4oC - Details on analytical verification of doses or concentrations:
- "FDA methods" taking samples from the bottom and two wings of the blender and again after storage at room temperature for 12 days. Recoveries were at least 90% of the theoretical values.
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 103 weeks
- Frequency of treatment:
- ad libitum
- Post exposure period:
- 1 week
- Dose / conc.:
- 3 750 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 7 500 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 563 mg/kg bw/day (actual dose received)
- Dose / conc.:
- 1 125 mg/kg bw/day (actual dose received)
- No. of animals per sex per dose:
- 50/sex/dose
Controls: 20/sex - Control animals:
- yes, plain diet
- Details on study design:
- - Dose selection rationale: based on a 7-week dietary study at up to 21,600 ppm
- Rationale for animal assignment (if not random): to provide the same total animal weight per cage - Positive control:
- none
- Observations and examinations performed and frequency:
- CAGE SIDE OBSERVATIONS: Yes
- Time schedule: twice daily
DETAILED CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS: Yes
- Time schedule: twice daily
BODY WEIGHT: Yes
- Time schedule for examinations: weekly for first four weeks, then monthly
FOOD CONSUMPTION AND COMPOUND INTAKE (if feeding study):
- Food consumption for each animal determined and mean daily diet consumption calculated as g food/kg body weight/day: No data
- Compound intake calculated as time-weighted averages from the consumption and body weight gain data: No data
FOOD EFFICIENCY:
- Body weight gain in kg/food consumption in kg per unit time X 100 calculated as time-weighted averages from the consumption and body weight gain data: No data
OPHTHALMOSCOPIC EXAMINATION: no
HAEMATOLOGY: no
CLINICAL CHEMISTRY: no
URINALYSIS: no
NEUROBEHAVIOURAL EXAMINATION: no - Sacrifice and pathology:
- GROSS PATHOLOGY: Yes
HISTOPATHOLOGY: Yes. All major tissues, organs and gross lesions. Rountinely examined were: skin, lymph nodes, mammary gland, salivary gland, bone marrow, trachea, lungs and bronchi, heart, thyroid, parathyroids, oesophagus, stomach, small intestine, large intestine, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, spleen, kidneys, adrenals, urinary bladder, prostate, uterus, testis, ovary, brain and pituitary. Occasionally other tissues were examined. - Other examinations:
- none
- Statistics:
- Cox's and Tarone's tests for differences in survival between the groups. The Fisher exact test was used to compare the tumour incidence between groups and the Armtage and Cochran test was used for linear trend in proportions, with continuity correction. Bonferroni inequality was used to compare several treated groups with a control group.
- Clinical signs:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- There were no treatment-related clinical signs of toxicity.
- Mortality:
- no mortality observed
- Description (incidence):
- No statistically significant or dose-related reduction in survival was reported when compered to controls for either sex.
- Body weight and weight changes:
- effects observed, treatment-related
- Description (incidence and severity):
- Body weight gain was depressed in the high-dose males throughout most of the study. In treated females a small, dose-related decrease in body weight gain was observed.
- Food consumption and compound intake (if feeding study):
- not specified
- Food efficiency:
- not specified
- Ophthalmological findings:
- not examined
- Haematological findings:
- not examined
- Clinical biochemistry findings:
- not examined
- Urinalysis findings:
- not examined
- Behaviour (functional findings):
- not examined
- Organ weight findings including organ / body weight ratios:
- not specified
- Gross pathological findings:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- No significant differences were observed between the groups
- Histopathological findings: non-neoplastic:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- There were no statistically significant differences between the groups
- Histopathological findings: neoplastic:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- A variety of tumours were found in both treated and control groups, all of which had previously been observed as spontaneous lesions in the mouse in previous studies. A dose-related increase in the incidence of lung tumours in the male mice (11, 18 and 26% in controls, low-dose and high-dose, respectively) was reported, but this was not statistically significant and was in the range of the historical controls. An increased incidence of tumours of the pituitary gland in females and liver in males was observed, but again these were not statistically significant. All other tumours occurred at similar frequency in treated and control animals. The report states "In the judgement of the pathologist, the nature, incidence, and severity of the lesions observed in this study provide no clear evidence of carcinogenic effect of EDTA in mice."
- Relevance of carcinogenic effects / potential:
- There were no statistically significant treatment-related increases in tumour incidence as compared to controls.
- Key result
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEL
- Effect level:
- ca. 7 500 ppm (nominal)
- Based on:
- test mat.
- Sex:
- male/female
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable due to absence of adverse toxic effects
- Remarks:
- No statistically significant increase in tumour incidence was detected between the treated and control groups
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEL
- Effect level:
- ca. 3 750 ppm (nominal)
- Based on:
- test mat.
- Sex:
- male/female
- Basis for effect level:
- body weight and weight gain
- Conclusions:
- In a good-quality NCI study, conducted according to a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, trisodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) showed no clear evidence of carcinogenic potential when fed to mice at up to 7500 ppm (about 1125 mg/kg bw/day) in a 2-year dietary study. Based on their structural similarity, it is expected that trisodium EDDS is also unlikely to induce tumorigenicity following long-term oral exposure.
- Executive summary:
In a good-quality NCI study, conducted according to a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, trisodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) was assessed for carcinogenic potential in a 2-year oral study in B6C3F1 mice.
Groups of 50 mice of each sex were fed 3750 or 7500 ppm (about 563 or 1125 mg/kg bw/day) for 2 years in the diet; groups of 20 control animals of each sex received the untreated diet. Animals were observed twice daily for clinical signs of toxicity and mortalities throughout the study. Body weights were recorded weekly (for the first month) and monthly thereafter. At necropsy all major organs and tissues, plus any gross lesions, were examined microscopically.
No signs of overt toxicity were observed; body weight gain was decreased in high-dose males and a small, dose-related decrease was observed in females when compared to the control groups. Survival was similar in all groups. At necropsy, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of tumours or non-neoplastic changes between treated animals and controls.
In conclusion, trisodium EDTA showed no evidence of carcinogenic potential when fed to mice at up to 7500 ppm (about 1125 mg/kg bw/day) in a 2-year dietary study. Based on the structural similarity of the two ethylenediamines, it is expected that trisodium EDDS is also unlikely to induce neoplasia following long-term oral exposure.
- Endpoint:
- carcinogenicity: oral
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- no data
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 451 (Carcinogenicity Studies)
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- only two doses (three are indicated in guideline) and only 20 controls/sex
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Study conducted for the National Cancer Institute using a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, on related material
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- prior to GLP
- Species:
- rat
- Strain:
- Fischer 344
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: AR Schmidt, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Age at study initiation: 6 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 85-110 g
- Fasting period before study: no
- Housing: 4 of same sex in polycarbonate cages
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): conventional, ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): "acidulated" water (pH 2.5), ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 14 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 21-25
- Humidity (%): 45-55
- Air changes (per hr): 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 16/8 - Route of administration:
- oral: feed
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Details on exposure:
- DIET PREPARATION
- Rate of preparation of diet (frequency): three times a week
- Mixing appropriate amounts with (Type of food): meal
- Storage temperature of food: 4oC - Analytical verification of doses or concentrations:
- yes
- Details on analytical verification of doses or concentrations:
- "FDA methods" taking samples from the bottom and two wings of the blender and again after storage at room temperature for 12 days. Recoveries were at least 90% of the theoretical values.
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 103 weeks
- Frequency of treatment:
- daily, ad libitum
- Post exposure period:
- 1 week
- Dose / conc.:
- 3 750 ppm (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 7 500 ppm (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 188 mg/kg bw/day (actual dose received)
- Dose / conc.:
- 375 mg/kg bw/day (actual dose received)
- No. of animals per sex per dose:
- 50/sex/dose
Control animals: 20/sex - Control animals:
- yes, plain diet
- Details on study design:
- - Dose selection rationale: based on a 7-week dietary study at up to 21,600 ppm
- Rationale for animal assignment (if not random): to provide the same total animal weight per cage - Positive control:
- none
- Observations and examinations performed and frequency:
- CAGE SIDE OBSERVATIONS: Yes
- Time schedule: twice daily
DETAILED CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS: Yes
- Time schedule: twice daily
BODY WEIGHT: Yes
- Time schedule for examinations: weekly for first four weeks, then monthly
FOOD CONSUMPTION AND COMPOUND INTAKE (if feeding study):
- Food consumption for each animal determined and mean daily diet consumption calculated as g food/kg body weight/day: no data
- Compound intake calculated as time-weighted averages from the consumption and body weight gain data: no data
FOOD EFFICIENCY:
- Body weight gain in kg/food consumption in kg per unit time X 100 calculated as time-weighted averages from the consumption and body weight gain data: no data
OPHTHALMOSCOPIC EXAMINATION: no
HAEMATOLOGY: no
CLINICAL CHEMISTRY: no
URINALYSIS: no
NEUROBEHAVIOURAL EXAMINATION: No - Sacrifice and pathology:
- GROSS PATHOLOGY: Yes
HISTOPATHOLOGY: Yes. All major tissues, organs and gross lesions. Rountinely examined were: skin, lymph nodes, mammary gland, salivary gland, bone marrow, trachea, lungs and bronchi, heart, thyroid, parathyroids, oesophagus, stomach, small intestine, large intestine, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, spleen, kidneys, adrenals, urinary bladder, prostate, uterus, testis, ovary, brain and pituitary. Occasionally other tissues were examined - Other examinations:
- none
- Statistics:
- Cox's and Tarone's tests for differences in survival between the groups. The Fisher exact test was used to compare the tumour incidence between groups and the Armtage and Cochran test was used for linear trend in proportions, with continuity correction. Bonferroni inequality was used to compare several treated groups with a control group.
- Clinical signs:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- In the last 6 months of the study corneal opacities, ascites and urine stains were seen in both control and treated groups, presumably due to aging. Survival was slightly higher in treated groups compared to the controls.
- Mortality:
- no mortality observed
- Description (incidence):
- In the last 6 months of the study corneal opacities, ascites and urine stains were seen in both control and treated groups, presumably due to aging. Survival was slightly higher in treated groups compared to the controls.
- Body weight and weight changes:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- Body weight gain was similar in all groups throughout study.
- Food consumption and compound intake (if feeding study):
- not specified
- Food efficiency:
- not specified
- Water consumption and compound intake (if drinking water study):
- not examined
- Ophthalmological findings:
- not examined
- Haematological findings:
- not examined
- Clinical biochemistry findings:
- not examined
- Urinalysis findings:
- not examined
- Behaviour (functional findings):
- not examined
- Organ weight findings including organ / body weight ratios:
- not specified
- Gross pathological findings:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- No significant differences were observed between the groups
- Histopathological findings: non-neoplastic:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- No neoplasms were detected in the nervous, musculoskeletal, urinary systems or in the organs of special sense. A variety of endocrine tumours were detected, some types of which were only observed in treated animals. However, since these only occurred in low numbers and were frequently reported in historical control data, they were not considered to be treatment-related. Overall, there was no statistically significant increase in the incidence of tumours in the treated animals compared to the controls. The report states "In the judgement of the pathologist, the nature, incidence, and severity of the lesions observed in this study provide no clear evidence of carcinogenic effect in rats."
- Histopathological findings: neoplastic:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- There were no statistically significant differences between the groups.
- Relevance of carcinogenic effects / potential:
- There were no statistically significant treatment-related increases in tumour incidence compared to the controls.
- Key result
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEL
- Effect level:
- ca. 7 500 ppm (nominal)
- Based on:
- test mat.
- Sex:
- male/female
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable due to absence of adverse toxic effects
- Remarks:
- No statistically significant increase in tumour incidence was detected between the treated and control groups
- Key result
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEL
- Effect level:
- ca. 7 500 ppm (nominal)
- Based on:
- test mat.
- Sex:
- male/female
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable due to absence of adverse toxic effects
- Remarks:
- No treatment-related clinical signs of toxicity were observed, average body weights were comparable to those of the controls and survival was similar (or slightly higher) in the treated animals compared to the controls.
- Conclusions:
- In a good-quality study conducted according to a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, trisodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) showed no evidence of carcinogenic potential when fed to rats at up to 7500 ppm (about 375 mg/kg bw/day) in a 2-year dietary study. Based on their structural similarity, it is expected that trisodium EDDS is also unlikely to induce tumorigenicity following long-term oral exposure.
- Executive summary:
Trisodium EDTA was assessed for carcinogenic potential in a 2-year dietary study in Fischer 344 rats.
Groups of 50 rats of each sex were fed 3750 or 7500 ppm in the diet (approximately 188 or 375 mg/kg bw/day) for 2 years; groups of 20 control animals of each sex received the untreated diet. Animals were observed twice daily for clinical signs of toxicity and mortalities throughout the study. Body weights were recorded weekly (for the first month) and monthly thereafter. At necropsy all major organs and tissues plus any gross lesions were examined microscopically.
No signs of overt toxicity were observed and body weight gain was similar in both the treated and control groups throughout the study. Survival was similar, or slightly better, in the treated animals than in the controls. At necropsy, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of tumours or non-neoplastic changes between treated animals and controls.
In conclusion, trisodium EDTA showed no evidence of carcinogenic potential when fed to rats at up to 7500 ppm (about 375 mg/kg bw/day) in a 2-year dietary study. Based on the structural similarity of the two ethylenediamines, it is expected that trisodium EDDS is also unlikely to induce neoplasia following long-term oral exposure.
Referenceopen allclose all
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEL
- 375 mg/kg bw/day
- Study duration:
- chronic
- Species:
- rat
Carcinogenicity: via inhalation route
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Carcinogenicity: via dermal route
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
According to EU CLP regulation, trisodium EDDS would not be classified as carcinogenic based on the data described.
Additional information
No long-term studies assessing the carcinogenic potential of trisodium EDDS, EDDS acid or its other simple salts have been identified.
However, in good-quality NCI studies, conducted according to a protocol similar to OECD Guideline 451, trisodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) was assessed for carcinogenic potential in 2-year dietary studies in Fischer 344 rats and B6C3F1 mice. Groups of 50 animals of each sex were fed 3750 or 7500 ppm (approximately 188 or 375 mg/kg bw/day for rats, and 563 and 1125 mg/kg bw/day for mice) for 2 years; groups of 20 control animals of each sex received the untreated diet. Animals were observed twice daily for clinical signs of toxicity and mortalities throughout the study. Body weights were recorded weekly (for the first month) and monthly thereafter. At necropsy all major organs and tissues plus any gross lesions were examined microscopically. In rats, no signs of overt toxicity were observed and body weight gain was similar in both the treated and control groups throughout the study. Survival was similar, or slightly better, in the treated animals than in the controls. In mice, no signs of overt toxicity were observed, but body weight gain was decreased in high-dose males and a small, dose-related decrease was observed in females when compared to the control groups. Survival was similar in all groups. At necropsy, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of tumours or non-neoplastic changes between treated animals and their matched controls (NCI, 1977). The final RAR (EU, 2004) also evaluated these studies and concluded that "that there is no concern on carcinogenic properties of EDTA".
A total of 33 Wistar rats (number and sex per group not reported) were divided into 5 groups and dosed with 0, 0.5, 1.0, or 5.0% disodium EDTA in the diet for a period of 2 years (approximately 0, 250, 500, and 2500 mg/kg bw/day, respectively). No gross lesions were observed upon histopathological examination of the internal organs and tissues (which included the heart, liver, pancreas, kidneys, urinary bladder, stomach, small and large intestines, lungs, spleen, ovaries, testes, voluntary muscle, and bone marrow smears). Based on the results of this study, the NOEL was considered to be 2500 mg/kg bw/day disodium EDTA in rats (Yang, 1952). In addition, a NOEL of 250 mg/kg bw/day (the highest tested dose) was seen in Wistar rats (25/sex/group) fed calcium disodium EDTA in the diet for 2 years (Oser et al. 1963).
Based on its structural similarity with EDTA, and its lack of mutagenic activity, it is expected that trisodium EDDS is also unlikely to induce neoplasia following long-term oral exposure at comparable doses.
References (not included elsewhere in IUCLID dossier - need to move to reference list in CSR)
BIBRA (1964). Summaries of toxicological data. Toxicology of EDTA. Food and Cosmetics Toxicology 2, 763-7.
EU (2004). European Union Risk Assessment Report (RAR); edetic acid (EDTA). Vol. 49. European Chemicals Bureau (ECB). Final report available at http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/DOCUMENTS/Existing-Chemicals/RISK_ASSESSMENT/REPORT/edtareport061.pdf.
Yang S-S (1952). Toxicological investigation of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid in the rat. Thesis dated May 1952 (cited in BIBRA, 1964).
Information on Registered Substances comes from registration dossiers which have been assigned a registration number. The assignment of a registration number does however not guarantee that the information in the dossier is correct or that the dossier is compliant with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (the REACH Regulation). This information has not been reviewed or verified by the Agency or any other authority. The content is subject to change without prior notice.
Reproduction or further distribution of this information may be subject to copyright protection. Use of the information without obtaining the permission from the owner(s) of the respective information might violate the rights of the owner.