On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Aurélien Mino <a.m...@free.fr> wrote: > On 07/11/2011 09:27 PM, Yin Izanami wrote: >> It may be that a single work isn't supposed to have multiple ISWC >> codes, but in reality I believe it is the case that many single works >> do in fact have multiple ISWC codes. >> I've been searching the ASCAP database >> (http://www.ascap.com/ace/search.cfm?requesttimeout=300) for Pokemon >> (USA) theme song ISWC codes. Many if not all of the Pokemon (USA) >> theme songs are listed multiple times, and they have multiple ISWC >> codes for what is ultimately the same song with same composition and >> lyrics. >> e.g., check writer "ROLFE DAVID KOS" (David Rolfe) and see how many >> times "Pokemon Advanced" (Season 6 theme) and "Unbeatable" (Season 8 >> theme) are listed. > > Could provide a concrete example? (ASCAP work ids, and related ISWCs). > I tried to reproduce, but I don't see so many times "Pokemon Advanced" > and "Unbeatable". > >> Thus, it is loss of information if only one ISWC code can be used on a >> Work. >> (I know there's a ticket MBS-2885 for this but there are zero comments >> on it. I figure putting this through RFC/RFV might get it more >> attention it needs.. and I assume it should be trivial to get the >> database to allow multiple ISWC entries since we can have recordings >> with multiple ISRC codes.) > > I have a problem with your proposal: > While your example is probably showing (I can't really judge) that a > work might have multiple ISWCs because rights management societies are > not doing their job correctly, > in most cases a work should have only one ISWC code. > And if you find a second ISWC for the same work, you should investigate > and you often realize that there are in fact 2 distinct works (e.g. with > a new arrangement or orchestration).
I've found at least one case of 2 ISWCs for exactly the same work. You might be right about most cases being different arrangements though, just not all of them. > I fear that just allowing multiple ISWCs on a work will lead to distinct > works being incorrectly represented by only one work in DB. > > So my prerequisites to this proposal are: > - adding a second ISWC should be strongly discouraged in the user > interface (including when you're going to merge works with different ISWCs) Can be a good idea. > - have a way to easily split a work (like what is proposed here: > http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2095) This would be useful even if we didn't accept multiple ISWCs, so sure. > - Aurélien > > _______________________________________________ > MusicBrainz-style mailing list > MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
