Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Personally, I'm indifferent towards the overview.  People seem to want these symbols cluttering them up and more power to them.  However, if you really believe that a title must have these ridiculous trademark symbols in them, which are only there to legally protect a company's brand, then you must argue for color, font type and size, etc.  Are we capturing the title as read, or the title as pictured?  A subtle distinction to be sure.  If you want copyright and registration symbols, I would suggest you want the title as pictured, because nobody reads "The History Channel (registered) Presents:  The Alamo".  If that's the case, then you would also care that the print was done in red.

I think you put my thoughts into words.  Nobody reads ithe legal symbols outloud or in their head.  Regardles of it being in the title or back of box discription.    The overview does not bother me as much, but it does bother me in the title.  It does not look right, and it could effect the sort of the title. 

Ken really needs to weigh in on this.

Quoting obatu100:

Quote:
Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Personally, I'm indifferent towards the overview.  People seem to want these symbols cluttering them up and more power to them.  However, if you really believe that a title must have these ridiculous trademark symbols in them, which are only there to legally protect a company's brand, then you must argue for color, font type and size, etc.  Are we capturing the title as read, or the title as pictured?  A subtle distinction to be sure.  If you want copyright and registration symbols, I would suggest you want the title as pictured, because nobody reads "The History Channel (registered) Presents:  The Alamo".  If that's the case, then you would also care that the print was done in red.

I think you put my thoughts into words.  Nobody reads ithe legal symbols outloud or in their head.  Regardles of it being in the title or back of box discription.    The overview does not bother me as much, but it does bother me in the title.  It does not look right, and it could effect the sort of the title. 

Ken really needs to weigh in on this.

Who says nobody "reads" it?  Do you read aloud when you read?  Do you move your lips?  The Trademark and Registered and Copyright symbols are visual cues, and have specific meaning, as well as legal meanings.  They are not vocalized, but you still "read" them because when you see the symbol, your brain supplies the meaning, just like any other letter, number, or punctuation mark.  Therefore, they should be there in the Overview.

Quoting Katatonia:

Quote:
Hmm, I don't know... I can't even remember ever encountering that before.

Every Star Trek Movie titl includes the "TM" mark.

They have always been left out.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Not discussing the overview, we're discussing the titles.  The overview is very clear cut and nobody is questioning it.

Do you want to have to do a search for "The History Channel ® Presents" in the database when doing an add by title, or would you rather search for "The History Channel Presents"?  That is the issue.

It seems like a no-brainer to me, but I know there are some folks out there that actually want you to have to search for the "®" symbol in titles.

Well, to stir the pot even more, "The History Channel Presents", as far as I am concerned" is NOT part of the title anyway.

Nor is "Alfred Hitchcock Presents", or "Walt Disney Presents", etc. etc.!

Blarg!  Bad example. 

oh I hate to prolong this part of the conversation, but I disagree about The Alamo title.  I originaly thought the Presents part did not belong, but I changed my mind in this case.  This is not a tv series.  It is a collection of documentries.  Thus the title. 

Their Revolution series (733961762303) has the presented by on the cover.  But i would not include that part.  This was a complete tv series.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Katatonia:

Quote:
Hmm, I don't know... I can't even remember ever encountering that before.

Every Star Trek Movie titl includes the "TM" mark.

They have always been left out.

Means nothing, Hal. As i have said a couple of times, juts because they have been left out is indicative of NOTHING. I have not made note of it personally, so I never entered the data. I am working on some other titles at the present time., but I will watch more closely in the future. My guess would be I would use exactly the same standard I used for Alfred Hitchcock's, or "Mister Roberts", I would check the cover against the actual On Screen data and if they match....so be it. If they don't then I would not include it.

I do not apply some bizzare standards, as I have seen recently that winds up with a mess of inconsistent handling of data, making it difficult and unnecessarily complex for new users to figure out what we are doing. I use the same standards ALWAYS for EVERY title, whether I personally like it or not,

Skip

First off, I simply made an observation that all of the Star Trek movies have "TM" in their titles AND an observation that they have always been left out.

Your "Means nothing, Hal. As i have said a couple of times, juts because they have been left out is indicative of NOTHING", was totally uncalled for!

It is not a "meaningless" observation.  It is a clear indication of a long standing and accepted practice of how these titles have been entered.

Just a quick check shows the following:

All DVD covers include the "TM".  Voyager has it after "Voyager".  Everything else has it after "Star Trek".

Actual film credits:
ST: TOS - no "TM"
Star Trek VI - no "TM"
ST: DS9: Season 3: Disc 1 - no "TM"
ST: Voyager: Season 2: Disc 1 - no "TM"
ST: Enterprise:Season 2: Disc 4 - no "TM" (in fact, no "Star Trek" in the title)

Since the Rule for TV Sets is to take the title from the DVD cover, and not from the actual film credits, the current profiles do not follow the letter of the Rule, since they do not include the "TM".

The movies look OK, since for them the title is to come from the actual credits.

So the question becomes, do we really want to include the "TM" in the titles in DVD Profiler after all these years not using it, especially knowing that it will once again screw up the search function for titles?

Just for Star Trek, we are talking about 150+ profiles for the TV Series.

I actually added "TM" into my local database many moons ago, and then removed them when I realized the problems it will cause.

I wonder how long it will take to get to 30 pages on this debate???? 

I am happy to report that, at least for Star Terk V, while the ™ appears on the cover, it does NOT appear On Screen.

Skip

Quoting nolesrule:

Quote:
That said, it's not appropriate for us to use any legal symbols in the title field of the profile because the symbol itself isn't part of the actual title.

I absolutely agree.