| Author |
Message |
| Registered: May 9, 2007 |  Posts: 50 |
| | Posted: | | | | It is possible with the Blu-ray format that some titles will be released and then later on it is discovered that the original release of it would be defective.
Example: Die Hard 2: this disc was supposed to have a DTS HD MA 5.1 soundtrack but a mistake in the transfer made it DTS HD only. Later on 20th Century Fox made a statement that this was in fact an error and that a reissue will be made to correct the situation and a replacement program was put in place.
Here's the statement found at http://www.foxbd.com/choose/new/:" [i]Die Hard 2: Die Harder (Blu-ray)
Some players will not support DTS-HD MA decoding for playback when connected to a HDMI V1.3 receiver that supports DTS-HD MA decoding.
Solution: If you have a disc with the above issue, please contact support@foxhome.com for instructions on how to receive a replacement disc. Menu background issues have been reported on some players." [/i]
It is clear that with statement that a mistake in the line of production of the disc occurred and then was identify as such.
So I would suggest that the contribution rules is modify to reflect this situation. This will of course exclude any misprint. I would say that if in this example 20th Century Fox would have said that is was simply a misprint issue and that no replacement program would have been put in place the original soundtrack would be DTS HD, but as they have reprinted new disc with DTS HD MA then not misprint error on the cover and that they admitted that it was a problem the profile on this data base should reflect that and should be the only exception. The only contribution that could be accepted such an event would be to produced (like in this case) the company statement or the link to provide the proof that it was a mistake otherwise everybody could tell hey I got a DTS sound not a DTS HD MA(caused by a receiver that doesn't support the HD soundtrack) and sorry screw up this data base. |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | I've said for years we need an additional field to notify peopel of errata (misprinted run-times, aspect ratios, etc) to avoid edit wars and also to notify of recalls & exchanges. |
|
| Registered: July 31, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,506 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ace_of_Sevens: Quote:
I've said for years we need an additional field to notify peopel of errata (misprinted run-times, aspect ratios, etc) to avoid edit wars and also to notify of recalls & exchanges. While there is no field in the program, there is a log in the contribution notes so edit wars shouldn't happen if people read those first (which they're supposed to BTW). |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ace_of_Sevens: Quote:
I've said for years we need an additional field to notify peopel of errata (misprinted run-times, aspect ratios, etc) to avoid edit wars and also to notify of recalls & exchanges. Ace: That is called Contribution Notes and as the Rules state: " Read the prior Contribution Notes. They will give you information about contributions that other users have made. There are two specific things that you need to be particularly aware of: * Have other users verified discrepancies between the cover and the actual disc information? If so do not contribute the incorrect box information again. * Are there pending contributions from other users, which have yet to be evaluated by Invelos screeners? If so, you need to ensure that your contribution will not overwrite pending corrections with incorrect information again. Or are you duplicating the contribution that is pending, just contributing the same information again?" Then be complete in your notes and document what you find, even CLT Results. otherwise nothing is achieved and adding a field to the program wii not achieve anything. We have the ability to create a bibliograopphy which backs up our data, IF you take advantage of it.I can promise you there are few people, outside of me thta do this...religiously. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: May 9, 2007 | | Posts: 50 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just to make sure that everyone understand,
The example I have mentioned is real, I have already tried to make it corrected but I meet a wall of protestation and at the end my contribution was declined although I had documented the facts. the main reason of the rebuf was that it was considered the "original" release even if 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment confirmed that the DTS HD MA soundtrack that was playing DTS HD was an accident and have reissued a new disc prints to correct the situation and that applies to everyone that had the defective disc.
In my point of view, to allow that DTS HD for Die Hard 2 being accepted in those ciscontances is a non sense. The profil should relfect the reality moslty. For those who have a defective disc and don't wish to benefit the exchange program that 20th Century Fox have put in place has been their choice and should keep local this profil as it is not reflecting the reality and I beleive that this data base should reflect mostly reality. THe main probleme that there is no mention in the contribution rules of what to do in such event. That is why I want to recommend that the rules for contribution is modified to included such situation but have to be proven. In the case of Die Hard 2, it is clear and proven that the DTS HD playback was a mistake and 20th CFHE have made the proper arrangement to correct it. Unfortunatly, Some people are so "stuck up" that they apply the contribution rules by the letter and no exeption. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting robetclo2516: Quote:
Just to make sure that everyone understand,
The example I have mentioned is real, I have already tried to make it corrected but I meet a wall of protestation and at the end my contribution was declined although I had documented the facts. the main reason of the rebuf was that it was considered the "original" release even if 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment confirmed that the DTS HD MA soundtrack that was playing DTS HD was an accident and have reissued a new disc prints to correct the situation and that applies to everyone that had the defective disc.
In my point of view, to allow that DTS HD for Die Hard 2 being accepted in those ciscontances is a non sense. The profil should relfect the reality moslty. For those who have a defective disc and don't wish to benefit the exchange program that 20th Century Fox have put in place has been their choice and should keep local this profil as it is not reflecting the reality and I beleive that this data base should reflect mostly reality. THe main probleme that there is no mention in the contribution rules of what to do in such event. That is why I want to recommend that the rules for contribution is modified to included such situation but have to be proven. In the case of Die Hard 2, it is clear and proven that the DTS HD playback was a mistake and 20th CFHE have made the proper arrangement to correct it. Unfortunatly, Some people are so "stuck up" that they apply the contribution rules by the letter and no exeption. The problem here robetclo, is the error was released and not everyone will return the "defective" copy. It is not disimilar from the famed upside down airplane stamp, which is now worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. The error was the ORIGINALLY released copy, any replacement if they did not change the UPC would HAVE to be done via Disc ID. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | If I understand the issue correctly I have to agree with Dr Pavlov (at least in regards to the pending contribution). You can't change the audio on the current profile to match the replacement disk, at least I don't believe you can according to the rules. To me however this is a special case where a PM to Ken or Gerri may be the best bet. FWIW I will not be returning my copy  |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quite right, Rick. The ERROR was the ORIGINAL release,and as I noted there are those who will keep the error.
BUT it is not a special case at all, thse things do happen. Simply create a new Profile based on the Disc ID, assuming they did not change the UPC#.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | That's what I thought. I haven't voted NO though since there needs to be a way to add the correct information (?).  I'm hoping someone will come up with an idea in the next page or so. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | What other idea? Even Gerri has previously stated that Disc ID based Profiles are legitimately done in such cases. What other idea can there possibly be?  Thr idea has been given correctly. I see he has withdrawn the attempted Overwrite and presumably has or is building a Disc ID based Profile, which would be correct and accepted. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
What other idea can there possibly be?
If I knew that I would have suggested it!  |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Nonsense, the correct answer has been given and has always been there as a a legitimate way to construct a Profile. I could make a deeper comment, but I fear it might be viewed as an attack. All you really had to say is Skip's right that's what you do. Instead you make a statement that in essence was a call to start another muti-page argument when the answer has been given.  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
Nonsense, the correct answer has been given and has always been there as a a legitimate way to construct a Profile. I could make a deeper comment, but I fear it might be viewed as an attack.
All you really had to say is Skip's right that's what you do. Instead you make a statement that in essence was a call to start another muti-page argument when the answer has been given.
Skip Geez - get over yourself already. I said in my first post I agreed with you!!!! That doesn't mean a discussion cant happen to find a possible alternative solutions for the future. Just because the man behind the curtain gave his opinion doesn't mean the thread has to end. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting lyonsden5: Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:
Quote:
Nonsense, the correct answer has been given and has always been there as a a legitimate way to construct a Profile. I could make a deeper comment, but I fear it might be viewed as an attack.
All you really had to say is Skip's right that's what you do. Instead you make a statement that in essence was a call to start another muti-page argument when the answer has been given.
Skip
Geez - get over yourself already. I said in my first post I agreed with you!!!! That doesn't mean a discussion cant happen to find a possible alternative solutions for the future. Just because the man behind the curtain gave his opinion doesn't mean the thread has to end. That is not what you said initially, Rick. My answer applies to the here and now, as it always does, I don't know and can't know what tomorrow will bring. You initial agreement was correct, but you did not qualify your call for discussion. A boo-boo, that's fine.. Thaty is where half the problems come in around here Rick, failure to communicate properly "That's what I thought. I haven't voted NO though since there needs to be a way to add the correct information (?). I'm hoping someone will come up with an idea in the next page or so." There is no qualifier (future) so it cameoff as if you were trying to start aniother argument to try and find a way around what we have TODAY. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | I understand the confusion. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thank you. Score one for better communication, I hope. I try and i am sure I fail sometimes too. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|