| Registered: May 8, 2007 |  Posts: 270 |
| | Posted: | | | | There are several updates that I have voted no on. These are two examples.
The Bourne Identity 025192-155123
Suspect Zero 097363-419549
In both cases the PHE and UHE does not appear on the back cover.
Only PP and US with a date of the DVD release.
As per rules "DVD publishing company which is usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release)"
What say you?
Jim | | | Jim
More than I need, but not as many as I want! |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,550 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'd like to add as the person who submitted the Suspect Zero contribution, I used the web address of www.paramount.com/homeentertainment as the source because what is on the case is just the copyright (which for Suspect Zero is Paramount Pictures). But what do you do with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull? (well, any of the IJ movies really). There is no mention of Paramount Pictures and the copyright belongs to LucasFilm, so shouldn't LucasFilm be the MP for that one and not Paramount (be it Pictures or Home Entertainment)? On those cases, it uses the web address as well.
Maybe I'm off base, and if so, so be it. It just doesn't make sense, rules or not. | | | | Last edited: by The Movieman |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting eaglejd: Quote:
There are several updates that I have voted no on. These are two examples.
The Bourne Identity 025192-155123
Suspect Zero 097363-419549
In both cases the PHE and UHE does not appear on the back cover.
Only PP and US with a date of the DVD release.
As per rules "DVD publishing company which is usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release)"
What say you?
Jim I knew the wording would cause confusion, which is why I voted against it, but you have to remember that 'usually' doesn't mean always. There are times when the media publisher isn't listed, by name, on the case. As for your two examples... Paramount Pictures is the film studio, not the 'media publisher'. Paramount has never put the name of their media publisher on the case. They have always used a web address. The proper name for a particular release can be found in that web address. That name will be one of two choices...Paramount Home Video or Paramount Home Entertainment. Universal Studios is the parent company and copyright holder for all things Universal. It is neither the film studio nor the media producer. For Universal, the name will be one of four choices...Universal Homve Video, Universal Home Entertainment, Universal Studios Home Video or Universal Studios Home Entertainment. Some research will be needed to determine which one. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,684 |
| | Posted: | | | | Seems to me that it would be Ok to use an outside source (such as paramount.com) for Media Publisher, but if you take the info from somewhere other than the back cover you should clearly state so in the contribution notes. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 844 |
| | Posted: | | | | No matter where you get the info you should state it clearly in your notes, even the back cover. |
|