I'm assuming the initial release has it's own EAN so is profiled using that rather than the disc ID.

I would say the cover used is that of the first release that could not be profiled on a separate EAN so needed to use the ID instead, ie. the first box set released which contains that disc.

So if the Andy Garcia box came first, we use that cover. If the Movie Power #2 box came first, we use that one. Unless the initial release had no EAN to use, we wouldn't use that cover or overview.

I'm the user quoted by Giga.

The stand alone dvd has an EAN of its own (8715664020715), and of course is in the Invelos database by EAN. So that one's irrelevant.

Now, I wasn't aware there were actually two box sets containing the same disc containing The Unsaid. I'm assuming in both of them, The Unsaid would have to be contributed as a child profile by Disc ID (I don't have the Andy Garcia Movie Collection box).

In this situation, I agree with northbloke - use the box set data (both cover and overview) from the box that was released first. The Moviepower box was released in September 2003. I can't find any information on the release date of the other one (Giga contributed it very recently - can't seem to find it in any webshop here in The Netherlands - BTW, Giga: you might want to correct the Production Year in that box set profile - it's wrong - should be 2001 rather than 2006, oldest production in the set is The Unsaid! I submitted a similar correction for the other box set just now).

So until further notice, I would still argue: use both the cover and the overview from the Moviepower box.

In any case: replacing them with the ones from the stand alone dvd, which has an EAN of its own, is wrong.

I beg to differ. It is my understanding that as far as box sets go, the general approach for the central database is to use the box set cover for child profiles as well, unless the children have a cover of their own (separate packaging), no matter if there's a stand alone release for a film on a child or not. I have recently contributed children for a different box set myself and contributed covers of the box, and the screeners immediately approved them.

So, amending your rule, I would say: the first released disc-id that has to be contributed by disc ID is the more logic choice.

the rules don't say anything in this case. 3 releases with the same disc-id. All released under different packaging.

I did not have to mention that you can see that the stand alone is in the database with his EAN if you look at the first message and hover over the covers of the releases. it shows their EAN.

@ Giga:
My point was: what you want to do is copy covers and overview from a different profile to this one. And whilst that may be OK for local purposes, it's not OK for the Invelos database. E.g. I may like the cover or overview for the UK release of The Unsaid better than the ones for the NL release, but that's no reason to contribute them for the NL release.

@ North:
Thanks for reminding me (and all of us, for that matter)!

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
not at all, what i did was take the covers of the original release for that discid from the same distributor. So if you have a dvd box with 40 dvd's with no own cover you have to put 40 times the DVD box cover in to the childs cover, and what use has that? I don't get it. So i have now information in the child that is not belonging there? (Information of DVD's that are not in that box? Where is the logic in that.

Simply put, if you have a boxset with 40 dvds then yes, you have to use the parent profile's covers 40 times - that's the rules. No one's said it's logical, but it's the rules. You're free to change it locally, but not for the online.

I don't think there is any more I can add.  I agree with Dee and North.