Talk:Warner Music Group

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Warner Music Group is within the scope of the Record Labels Task Force, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of record labels. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

This is a mess!

1. List of artists before TOC? 2. What is the mess after the TOC?

Contents

[edit] Artist updates

Put in a few that weren't listed and tried to do some alphabetizing, the list was a mess. Danypo

Deleted the selection. Hardly needed, I don't see it for other labels. Unless every single act is listed (not just a few chart stars of today), it is not relevant. 74.65.39.59 20:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


Hey who wrote the entry for Warner Music Group??? They obviously have no idea what the company infra-structure looks like. How can you list Ryko as a "label" when it's actually an indie distribution company? Not to mention you left out Alternative Distribution Alliance. Hello, it's only the number one indie distributor in the US right now.

Also the merge with Time Warner/AOL was but a blip in Warner Music Group's history. Do your homework.

[edit] Short label descriptions

The big list of labels seemed kind of unhelpful as it was, so I added short descriptions where they seemed warranted. I did check out all the links, and the ones I didn't add anything to seemed less notable. (Clearly, every label was founded by somebody in some year, and has some acts signed to it, and if people are interested in the story behind any of the undescribed ones, they can click on the link.) If I've left out anything important, of course feel free to add it, but I would argue that if we added a description to every label, the list would be too packed with information and would become less helpful again. Nareek 13:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Machine Shop Recordings

Isn't the label reconizible enough to warrent a metion on the list?--4.157.104.46 15:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Here is your citation

Hachette, the French publishing company, bought Warner Books from Time Warner in 2006 and will rename itself Grand Central Publishing in the Fall of 2007. On every advertisement that contains the name Warner Books and the logo that Warner Music uses, the following legend is printed: “Warner Books and the ‘W’ logo are trademarks of Time Warner Inc., used under license.” NOWHERE does any variation of this EVER appear on ANY Warner Music release since the investor group bought the company from Time Warner. Therefore, the trademarks are not licensed to Warner Music, which would suggest that Time Warner still has some investment in this company. Peace. (MuzikJunky 05:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC))

According to the Warner Music Group's most recent annual report filed with the SEC (bolding added by me):
  • "An important part of our business is our trademarks. Our major trademarks are registered in every country where we believe the protection of these trademarks is important for our business. Our major trademarks include Atlantic, Elektra, Sire, Reprise and Warner/Chappell. We use certain trademarks pursuant to royalty-free license agreements. The duration of the license relating to the WARNER and WARNER MUSIC marks and a “W” logo is perpetual. The duration of the license relating to the WARNER BROS. RECORDS mark and WB & Shield designs is fifteen years from February 29, 2004. Each of the licenses may be terminated under certain limited circumstances, which include material breaches of the agreement, certain events of insolvency, and certain change of control events if we were to become controlled by a major filmed entertainment company. We actively monitor and protect against activities that might infringe, dilute, or otherwise harm our trademarks.
IANAL, but I believe as long as the trademarks are acknowledged on the packaging, that is sufficient. For example, Warner/Chappell Music, part of WMG, uses the WB shield in its logo. On its website, the page footers read "The name 'Warner/Chappell Music, Inc.' and the shield device are registered trademarks." —tregoweth (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

May I ask why this page is getting so much vandalism? There must be more vandalism on this page than on the articles for the other three major record labels. Why? -- M (speak/spoken) 14:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Missing labels

I noticed that Sire Records is not on this list of subsidiaries, there may be others missing. I dont know the structure, so I cannot place it properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.40.62.53 (talk) 04:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)