I have dozens of US discs with a "Sony Pictures Classics™" banner on the front cover. See below for a recent example. This particular profile, 043396-575318, happens to be the only one in my collection that has "Sony Pictures Classics" listed in the "Edition" field. Should it be listed there? Or shouldn't it? Isn't this just the film's theatrical release studio? Does this meet the contribution rules' requirement of "ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title"? Or does it just automatically qualify because it's on the front cover?

Personally, I think the edition field has gotten out of hand and everything and anything on the cover is now being put in as an edition.  Shoot, it doesn't even have to be on the cover to find it's way into the edition field.  If a slipcover has a limited pressing and then all pressings afterwards don't the the slipcover profile ends up with "Limited Edition" in the edition field.

Quoting rdodolak:

Quote:
Personally, I think the edition field has gotten out of hand and everything and anything on the cover is now being put in as an edition.

Totallly agree!

Quoting huskersports:

Quote:
I thought that SPC was the studio releasing the film, like Fox Searchlight: Not an Edition, but a studio.

Indeed. "Sony Pictures Classics" is indeed the theatrical release studio for this film, and that applies to all other films that I own with this banner on the cover as well. For all of those "Sony Pictures Classics" was the theatrical release studio, and all of those profiles list it as such. It's never listed as a media company, as there's no mention on any of those covers that it would be either the disc's publisher, licensor and/or distributor. Instead, the sole media company for all these releases is "Sony Pictures Home Entertainment" instead.

So "Sony Pictures Classics" is these films' theatrical release studio, while "Sony Pictures Home Entertainment" is the media company for these discs - that wasn't the question here. The question I was asking is whether theatrical release studio "Sony Pictures Classics" should also be put into the "Edition" field, just because it appears as a banner on the front cover. I asked that question not because I want to put it there, but because I encountered a profile where someone *had* done that, and I wanted to gauge opinions on that.

Personally, I agree with those that feel use of the "Edition" field has gotten out of hand. To me, not everything that we see on the cover needs to be crammed into that field. Personally, when I look at the contribution rules on the "Edition" field, it really doesn't look like this is what it was meant for. Let me quote the whole thing:

Quote:
The Edition field is for distinguishing between DVDs, and for indicating special versions and collections (for example The Criterion Collection, Widescreen, Full-Screen Edition, Director's Cut). It's usually safe to use one of the built-in selections if appropriate. If you are using a non-standard edition, take it from the DVD box, and ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title.

Going back to the specific example of this 'French Exit' profile under UPC 043396-575318: that's the sole profile for 'French Exit' in the US locality, so when the rules state to "ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title", I can't help noticing that that requirement isn't being met here. There's no "regular" edition where this "Sony Pictures Classics" version needs to be distinguished from. Instead, this *is* the "regular" (and only) edition. So if the rules tell me to "ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title", then I have a hard time putting "Sony Pictures Classics" into the "Edition" field, as that flat out doesn't meet that requirement. But that's just me.

Couple of reasons why I voted NO on the topic:

•  Sony Pictures Classics Inc. is a corporation, incorporated 12-Feb-1992, jurisdiction Delaware.

•  A branch corporation with the same name was incorporated 18-Nov-1992, jurisdiction California
    The branch corporation's statement of information lists business type as "MOTION PICTURE PRODUCTION".

•  The front cover shows SONY PICTURES CLASSICS™, that is a registered trademark, not a plain text title.
    Since when do we use registered trademarks for Edition?

•  Do we consider the company "STUDIOCANAL" an edition?
    I see this on the front cover of many 4K and Blu-ray releases, yet no one (to date) enters it as an edition.

"The Edition field is for distinguishing between DVDs, and for indicating special versions and collections"

Are the SPC releases the only release of the film(s) in question?  If that is the case, then its use in the edition field does not apply.

The Criterion Collection is also a media company, and it gets put in the edition field every time.  But, Criterion distinguishes from other releases of the same film by other media companies.  So it makes sense to put it there.  I'm not sure SPC falls in a similar category.

If the WB archive collection is an edition, so is this one. I still disagree that Arrow Video is an edition. I wonder who validated this as an edition anyway, should be fired. Als we don't use Eureka classics as an edition. This is "Edition-kind-of-thing" is just a hit or a miss....

Taken from the cover it would have to be Sony Pictures Classics™

Not that I bother with the idiotic things people put in the edition field. I've locked all my titles for years.