 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 12 13 14 15  Previous Next
|
|
(former) Studios Reference Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Transepoch: Quote:
Keep in mind that everything is "as originally released." 30 years from now, all studios may become Taco Bell, but it's still 20th Century Fox to us. If only that were true. The fact is, some people want a common name and, for them, that name is the 'current' name. As an example...though they made 4 films, you do not see 'Touchstone Films' in the first post of this thread. Neither will you find it in the main db. Why? Because they changed their name to 'Touchstone Pictures'. What those that advocate this aproach haven't considered is, what happens if the studio changes it's name again? Are we going to change the common name to accomidate that studio name change? | | | 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: October 23, 2008 | | Posts: 36 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69 (on page 13):Quote:
Quoting Kluge (also on Page 13):
Quote:
Which is the correct media publisher for Star Trek TOS DVDs?
On the cover I see only www.paramount.com/homevideo and Paramount Pictures copyright.
I would use Paramount Home Video as that was the name at the time they were released. The current name, Paramount Home Entertainment, would also be acceptable. Example DVD: "Vanilla Sky (UPC 097363393641) [I got a "No" vote on my update (asking for source), re-looked at box, checked Studio List, now here I am... And, yes, I'm aware PHV changed to PHE some years ago (see Wikipedia).]This DVD has the " www.paramount.com/homevideo" line on cover near bottom. Studio Ref. List on Pg. 1 says "Incorrect: Paramount Home Video (Vestige of the days of videotape and the only reference to it is a weblink)". Do we just put "Paramount Home Entertainment" even though it isn't on the cover, or what? PHE is the only "Distribution" company listed for Paramount. The weblink bit is down with the "©2002 by Paramount Pictures" DVD release data, not with the "©2001 by Paramount Pictures" film details. Studio Ref. List also says "Paramount Pictures" is a "Studio", not "Distribution". The Important Bits: I think that even though they're written out as words, not a graphic logo, PHV should be correct and treated as a logo ( a logo of words). •It is in bold and set above other text, followed immediately by address "5555 Melrose Avenue, etc.", not "Paramount Pictures, 5555 Melrose Ave., etc." •It stands out from the other text, just like the other 5 "logos" on the box. • It shares all the attributes of the other "logos" except it has no "graphical" component (boxes, circles, fancy silhouettes). Many prominent companies have registered Trademarks or ServiceMarks consisting only of words set in some unique typeface and style/coloring (see Dell, IBM, Campbell's, Coca-Cola, etc.). In this case, I believe Paramount Home Video is using www.paramount.com/homevideo where they would put Paramount Home Video if not for the decision to use www.paramount.com/homevideo. It kills two birds with one stone, tells you who they are and lets you know how to find them. Just my opinion, but I believe it makes sense. Even if PHV now calls itself PHE, they were PHV when these titles were released. RKO Radio Pictures doesn't exist any more, but we still know what that is/was and use it where appropriate... Many PHE releases have only the www.paramount.com/homeentertainment words, no logo (except the Paramount mountain), only Paramount Pictures mentioned in text, yet they get a pass, as PHE is on the acceptable Distributor list. I believe covers with www.paramount.com/homeentertainment should be treated as a logo as well, for the same reasons as stated above. I'll do whatever is deemed "correct", but PHE is not there, PHV is. Either we need to update the Studio List on Page 1, or make another "exception to the rule" (PHV "means" PHE, even though it doesn't say so)... Rules: "Enter the DVD publishing company which is usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release) on the back of the box. If the DVD Publishing company isn't located on the box or packaging, take the DVD publisher from the disc's credits." I'll bet most of the films that say PHV on the box say "PHV" or simply "Paramount DVD" on the discs, as well... There are many, many Paramount DVDs like this one. Mike  NOTE: I found 103 mentions of "Paramount" in the Contribution Discussion Forum, this (Kluge/Unicus69 discussion) is the only time this has come up for "entire message/any date" search... NOTE #2: I hope Ken makes the final decision on this. If we put PHE, we break one rule (not on the box), if we put PHV, we break another (not on the list). EDIT (Dec. 05): On P.1 of this thread "Columbia TriStar Home Video (original distribution division name, use as necessary, for example ORIGINAL release of 'Sleepless in Seattle')" is allowed, but "Paramount Home Video" is a "vestige" of the past and is not allowed. Just looking for consistency here...  | | | | “Practically perfect people never permit sentiment to muddle their thinking.” — M. Poppins, 1964 | | | | Last edited: by SgtDetritus007 |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have recently submitted exactly the same thing but so far have only received yes votes.
At the time the DVD was released the company was called Paramount Home Video, and so that's what goes into the MP field. I also quoted the website address as source.
There is nothing in the rules to say we have to record the "current" name of the company, only the "correct" one. And at the time of the DVD's release the correct name was "Home Video" not "Home Entertainment". |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | After seeing a few contributions that are changing the correct MP to the incorrect distributor, I have to point out that the list on the first page is no longer correct. A lot of the companies that are listed as incorrect, based on the old rules for distributor, are now correct for the new rules that ask for Media Publisher. | | | 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 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
After seeing a few contributions that are changing the correct MP to the incorrect distributor, I have to point out that the list on the first page is no longer correct. A lot of the companies that are listed as incorrect, based on the old rules for distributor, are now correct for the new rules that ask for Media Publisher. I wasn't aware of that. In that case we should ask James to put a warning into the first post - at least temporarily - until it's decided whether we update the list or simply abandon it and ask for it to be unpinned. As you've said in the past, more and more people are submitting "as credited" studio names, so is it really worth the effort to fix/update the list? | | | | Last edited: by northbloke |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | The only reason I bring it up is beacuse I have seen contributions that are making changes based on that list. I will give you an example of one I just voted 'no' to: Quote:
Distributor- "Touchstone Home Entertainment" changed to BVHE, per back cover ["Dist. by BVHE, Inc."] [Touchstone is "incorrect" on studio list] 'Touchstone Home Entertainment' is the proper MP but was removed, and replaced by the distributor, because the studio thread says it is an incorrect entry. | | | 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 | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | The list is outdated now based on 3.5 standards and therefore I've removed it.
Over the past couple of months, I've sent numerous PMs and "contact us" messages to Invelos requesting that this thread be unpinned. So far, no response.
If someone wants to start up a revised studio list that is compatible with 3.5, just let me know and I'll forward the old studio data to you. Hopefully then Invelos will act to unpin this thread and pin your new thread. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Sorry James, I don't have the knowledge needed to take over. If only there were a "studio buff" who frequents the forums regularly  Perhaps he (or she?) would be willing to give it a go for a while. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting lyonsden5: Quote:
Sorry James, I don't have the knowledge needed to take over. If only there were a "studio buff" who frequents the forums regularly Perhaps he (or she?) would be willing to give it a go for a while. Guess not James. Looks like your going to have to give this away at fire sale prices to get rid of it.  We could always start a big fight and get the thread locked.  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting lyonsden5: Quote:
Quoting lyonsden5:
Quote:
Sorry James, I don't have the knowledge needed to take over. If only there were a "studio buff" who frequents the forums regularly Perhaps he (or she?) would be willing to give it a go for a while.
Guess not James.
Looks like your going to have to give this away at fire sale prices to get rid of it.
We could always start a big fight and get the thread locked. Or we qould turn it into one of those silly "quote" threads |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | | Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,852 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
more and more people are submitting "as credited" studio names Isn't that what the Rules say to do? --------------- |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| |
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 12 13 14 15 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |