but i admit, i hadn't actually looked at the release in question and seeing it now, i'm a bit less confident
although, changing the existing release would've been controversial anyway, and it's easier to merge than to disentangle, so eh
damn those digital stores that allow the artist to just change all information whenever they feel like it without any history
intrnl joined the channel
intrnl
wanted to ask something about release labels, so as per the docs for special purpose labels, it is true that some music services like Spotify requires a label field even if it's self-publishing right?
there's no imprints, and it's been digital releases so far
Erin joined the channel
ErBear has quit
Erin has quit
Erin joined the channel
ErBear joined the channel
Erin has quit
darwin
intrnl: this is a point of some contention
griff_ joined the channel
intrnl: my perspective differs from others, I prefer there to be a legal entity, or some indication that the entity exists beyond self publishing to streaming sites (even a bandcamp for the "label" or a twitter account or etc.)
intrnl: but it's a fair critique that many "labels" that do have a bandcamp or other social media do not have a legal entity
whatever is going on there with (48.0kHz/24bit) and so on is probably wrong too, fwiw.
ErBear is now known as Erin
unless there's clarity that there's actually a deliberate different mastering for the higher res files, they should not be a distinct recording or release.
interesting in this case that there's different barcodes..
intrnl
to me, i honestly feel that it's fine as long as there is actual intent to make a label for themselves, which in this case i don't think the artist i mentioned was intending to do, more simply wanting to self-publish digitally.
darwin
yeah, I am not-unsympathetic to that view...
but often the only indication that they intend to make a label for themselves is that their "label" credit on spotify etc. has a name different from their artist name.
ROpdebee
if there would be an actual legal entity, wouldn't there be an <artist name> Inc. or similar in the (c) and (p) instead of just <artist name> on Spotify?
darwin
what if the legal entity shares a name with the artist :)
phunyguy has quit
intrnl has quit
phunyguy joined the channel
griff_ has quit
griff_ joined the channel
xplt has quit
kinduff has quit
kinduff joined the channel
Major_Lurker has quit
griff_ has quit
MrProdigy has quit
MrProdigy joined the channel
furq_ joined the channel
furq has quit
griff_ joined the channel
griff_ has quit
furq joined the channel
furq_ has quit
griff_ joined the channel
D4RK-PH0ENiX joined the channel
d4rkie has quit
killui has quit
thelounge5 has quit
thelounge5 joined the channel
Glassjoe has quit
thomasross has quit
adhi001 joined the channel
averyfollett has quit
griff_ has quit
griff_ joined the channel
prints has quit
eFfeM joined the channel
eFfeM has quit
griff_ has quit
griff_ joined the channel
trolley has quit
trolley joined the channel
xplt joined the channel
griff_ has quit
oldtopman has quit
oldtopman joined the channel
dave_uy has quit
dave_uy joined the channel
adhi001 has quit
CatQuest
ROpdebee: probably. but as chaban's ticket shows: our documentation doesnt actually say clearly what the *right* way of doing it is either