« Return to Thread: AmazonRelationship: Special cases
Re: AmazonRelationship: Special cases
by Chad Wilson-2
::
Rate this Message:
On 11/03/2009 3:28 a.m., Martin Lesser wrote:
> A discussion about a perhaps special case happened today[1] triggered
> some questions here:
>
> 1. Does it make sense to follow the (probably economic driven) decision
> of amazon which of their stores is the "main" store for a release
> (the one which offers a release without the [IMPORT]-addition) in
> *any* case or could this be sometimes inconvenient for a MB-user?
>
IMO, if it's inconvenient, too bad. IMPORT pages often have errors and
sometimes different or lower quality artwork, as well as irrelevant
"release" dates and high pricing. So yes, I think it makes perfect
sense. The availability of a release as an IMPORT at various AMZ domains
may change quickly over time; much less so than the availability at its
original release location. There will be more reviews and other data on
the release country's store.
> 2. Is the location of the label releasing an album more important than
> the origin and/or location of the artist if it comes to the
> Amazon-Relationship? Especially if script and/or language of release
> and amazon shop differ?
>
Yes, IMO. See above.
> There are cases where an (i.e. French) artist is more popular on a
> foreign market (i.e. Japan) also he/she produces his/her titles in his
> native language/script and these titles are "only" transliterated into
> the foreign language/script by the foreign producing company/label and
> this transliteration only happens for the cover/package of the release.
>
> In the situation described above it is IMO unconvenient for a user if
> he/she visits a release page on MB with content he/she is able to read
> but is forwarded to a shop where the track-titles are totally different
> from the ones he/she has seen on MB. Wouldn't it be better to link to
> one of the amazon-stores which uses the same script (i.e. Latin) the
> titles of the release are written in instead of linking to a shop using
> a different script (i.e. Kanji) and not depend too much on decisions
> based on marketing-issues by amazon?
>
> According to the MB-guidelines[2] "it is *preferred* to enter the
> version of the amazon store which sells the original version". What's
> the definition for "original version"? The location of the producing
> company/label (vs. i.e. location of recording or mixing company if any)?
>I don't understand why this is an issue. Link to any non-IMPORT version.
Often there will be multiple. We can't control the script that Amazon
use on their pages, but it still doesn't make sense to me to use an
IMPORT on .com for a Japanese release just because .co.jp transliterates
the English to Kanji. Users can always set up preferred Amazon domains
in their preferences, as can anyone syndicating our data.
> The requirement to link to the amazon-store which sells the original is
> not traceable over the time (and not logical in some cases) - amazon may
> change this at any time caused by marketing decisions. A good example
> for this is another release[3] - it's up to the reader to find the
> current one of the six amazon shops without the [IMPORT]-note ;-) The
> original release was published by sonymusic.fr and you would expect that
> amazon.fr is the "main" shop (but isn't).
>
That's probably because Amazon.fr is junk and mislabels many local
releases as import. Other stores do not typically have this issue in my
experience. We can't really avoid this.
> Should the amazon-linking continue the strict way it is required at the
> moment or should this issue be handled more liberate in the future?
>
Strict, IMO, for consistency and maximum probability that the data on
the main page will be relevant and useful.
Chad / voiceinsideyou
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
> A discussion about a perhaps special case happened today[1] triggered
> some questions here:
>
> 1. Does it make sense to follow the (probably economic driven) decision
> of amazon which of their stores is the "main" store for a release
> (the one which offers a release without the [IMPORT]-addition) in
> *any* case or could this be sometimes inconvenient for a MB-user?
>
IMO, if it's inconvenient, too bad. IMPORT pages often have errors and
sometimes different or lower quality artwork, as well as irrelevant
"release" dates and high pricing. So yes, I think it makes perfect
sense. The availability of a release as an IMPORT at various AMZ domains
may change quickly over time; much less so than the availability at its
original release location. There will be more reviews and other data on
the release country's store.
> 2. Is the location of the label releasing an album more important than
> the origin and/or location of the artist if it comes to the
> Amazon-Relationship? Especially if script and/or language of release
> and amazon shop differ?
>
Yes, IMO. See above.
> There are cases where an (i.e. French) artist is more popular on a
> foreign market (i.e. Japan) also he/she produces his/her titles in his
> native language/script and these titles are "only" transliterated into
> the foreign language/script by the foreign producing company/label and
> this transliteration only happens for the cover/package of the release.
>
> In the situation described above it is IMO unconvenient for a user if
> he/she visits a release page on MB with content he/she is able to read
> but is forwarded to a shop where the track-titles are totally different
> from the ones he/she has seen on MB. Wouldn't it be better to link to
> one of the amazon-stores which uses the same script (i.e. Latin) the
> titles of the release are written in instead of linking to a shop using
> a different script (i.e. Kanji) and not depend too much on decisions
> based on marketing-issues by amazon?
>
> According to the MB-guidelines[2] "it is *preferred* to enter the
> version of the amazon store which sells the original version". What's
> the definition for "original version"? The location of the producing
> company/label (vs. i.e. location of recording or mixing company if any)?
>
Often there will be multiple. We can't control the script that Amazon
use on their pages, but it still doesn't make sense to me to use an
IMPORT on .com for a Japanese release just because .co.jp transliterates
the English to Kanji. Users can always set up preferred Amazon domains
in their preferences, as can anyone syndicating our data.
> The requirement to link to the amazon-store which sells the original is
> not traceable over the time (and not logical in some cases) - amazon may
> change this at any time caused by marketing decisions. A good example
> for this is another release[3] - it's up to the reader to find the
> current one of the six amazon shops without the [IMPORT]-note ;-) The
> original release was published by sonymusic.fr and you would expect that
> amazon.fr is the "main" shop (but isn't).
>
That's probably because Amazon.fr is junk and mislabels many local
releases as import. Other stores do not typically have this issue in my
experience. We can't really avoid this.
> Should the amazon-linking continue the strict way it is required at the
> moment or should this issue be handled more liberate in the future?
>
Strict, IMO, for consistency and maximum probability that the data on
the main page will be relevant and useful.
Chad / voiceinsideyou
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
« Return to Thread: AmazonRelationship: Special cases
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
