So, Group Therapy has this option to copy release credits from another release and exclude format specific roles (e.g. lacquer cut is removed when copying from vinyl to digitial).
I wonder if digital releases should have liner notes credits removed.
This is the current map, any credit containing those words is unchecked when copying:
const FORMAT_EXCLUDE_DEFAULT = { digital: ['lacquer', 'vinyl', 'pressed', 'printed', 'manufactured'] };
I assume you meant “liner notes”?
There are a lot of others I can think of - “Glass Mastered”, “Photography”, etc.
I would recommend stripping all Release level notes as most Digital Media barely go beyond noting copyright. Adding the rest because it appears on a CD version can be technically misleading as it didn’t actually appear on that version of the release
No help there, its already muscle memory 
I guess that is just incomplete information there. That seems overly restrictive too - compiler/mixer/instruments/artwork etc. are completellly relevant IMO.
Photography
Why ?
In some ways this is tricky - the data is not on the release. Copyrights may be same, but distribution? Is distribution the same for the CD and the Digital Media? Not always. “Licenced to” may be different deal with Digital. Don’t know for certain. And all the rest is not on this version of the release. Copying too much becomes “educated guess”.
I don’t know the answer. I thought MB said “as on release” so we are safer in knowing it is correct data, but I see the logic of wanting to add production details. A line between “as on release” for comparing the version in hand versus “extra information that I have researched”…
“Photography” is usually in the booklet. No booklet, so no photography. Same as liner notes. Multi-page booklets have a lot of extra stuff that isn’t always on the front cover image.
Main focus needs to strip the physical. Area - manufactured in, printed in; Label - Pressed by, glass mastered; Place - manufactured at, printed at. A lot of these will refer to a physical product. Even Label - Rights Societies vary by area\year and assume very different for Digital.
The “legals” may be the same, but how to know for sure?
I don’t know the answer. I thought MB said “as on release”
I think we should go factual rather than blindly follow what is written as then we would have to write in typos and various obvious errors.
Regarding original question, liner notes may actually be presented in digital as images. I didn’t yet see that booklets are offered as downloads but that is just current state of affair.
This is what I meant. I wasn’t talking typos. The factual is not visible on the Digital Media.
Main focus needs to strip the physical.
I agree, that is stripped. I created new “consolidation tool” in Group Therapy that makes this clearly visible:
Before auto select
After auto select
A small number of Digital release drop a booklet with the release, but you are normally talking “direct from artist” shops and not the streaming stores.
It is certainly a minority.
“lacquer cut at” would be a vinyl thing. (In that “physical media” list)
Sorry, I think this is what you are saying your screenshot shows… wasn’t clear to me.
Yeah, thx, it accidentally went over to CD, will fix that.
If in one Release Group you are copying between different media, not just digital, then you have problems with anything to do with CD manufacture. It is common for 1990s CDs to be pressed in many different plants. Often at the same time. Or over the following decades the plants change for new reissues.
If you are auto-editing for people so they don’t need to check the results, then manufacturing data like that should never be copied between even the CD releases as it will always change.
And yet I use the current “copy release credits” script to enter CD series where a number of totally different CDs from different Release Groups are sharing same manufacturing and production credits, so in that case I’d need the Manufacturer to stay the same.
Trying to think for people is tricky as they will always use your tool in a way you didn’t expect. 
Pesky users
In some ways I think it is better to err on the side of “copy too little” than “too much”. If you copy the bare bones that you know is likely to be common, then the editor can add the missing items.
Better than copying too much and the editor being too lazy to remove the excess.
A script can’t be made idiot proof as there is always a better class of idiot on the way… 
Qobuz has releases with digital booklets, including classical (Deutsche Gramofon), jazz (Ben Sidran), reggae (Groundation). It influences my choice in buying or not a release: I may decide to wait, hoping that someday the same album will be available with a booklet. I suppose booklets are available in other shops too. But it is true that the majority of the digital releases I bought from Qobuz did not have a booklet.
Here it is how it looks now, after clicking auto select
It added letters with rectangles as proposal, you need to confirm.
@IvanDobsky, RG contains 3 releases, I am doing this from Vinyl release (C).
There is auto select you need to invoke youself, but by default script maps nothing, it presents matrix so you can cherry-pick. THat is, it can be fully automatic or not. People certainly need to check results, particularly for stuff like Japanese release made in Japanese factory but compared to usual stuff we have that is rare.
@davitof thanx for info about Qobuz, interesting.
I like breaking things… what does your script do here? Release group “The Dark Side of the Moon” by Pink Floyd - MusicBrainz
That is an example of a 50 year old album pressed in so many many ways over the decades. And then confused with remastering and reissues and repackaging and even bootlegs.
I assume these get separate Releases in a Release Group to separate them from the Spotify et al versions where they don’t supply booklets.
Great, I like examples like this one.
It works, and really fast too, although script is not designed for such extreme cases right now:
I know how to break things. Thought you’d appreciate that. And by breaking them know it improves things. Great to hear your script stood up to the fight.
Go to OLD artists like Floyd, Beatles and you’ll often find long lists like this.
Here is an example where you can’t now rely on “copyright” as it changes over the years. Same with “artwork” as I no idea who those people at the top of the page are as artwork here is clearly Hipgnosis. (Assume other names are coming from bootlegs)
If you scroll across the list you’ll now see a “majority vote” may be needed to pick an answer…
Thank you. Will solve that easily - with so much releases it doesn’t make sense for script to auto include anything in matrix but you should cherry-pick releases (I still would accept picking all as it might be relevant for some extreme cases of for example Kpop)
You could have subtly different handling based on age. How old a release group is will give you a hint of the variations of the reissues you will hit. Gap between oldest and newest release. This causes changes to the legals, and other data, over those decades.
Whereas when K-Pop or Talyor Swift issue 30 different variations of the same release at the same time then you’ll more likely meet common data but that release window will be narrower.
