Parent labels, subsidiaries and label types - how to use?

For example, Warp (Records) - its current state on MB → label (type) relationships:
Warp (Original Production) ← should rather be “imprint” than “original production”?
subsidiary Warp Records (Original Production) ← a subsidiary?
subsidiaries Arcola, Gift Records, Lex Records (all Original Production) and Ndeya (-) ←subsidiaries of the label/imprint? more likely of the company…
imprint of Warp Records Limited (Holding)
→→→ Warp Records Limited (Holding) has also a subsidiary Warp Films (-) ←Warp launched a film company, Warp Films (Wikipedia), but it seems to be a different company

Warp acts also as a publisher, that’s probably a different company:
Warp Publishing (Publisher) - with entries credited as “Warp Publishing Ltd”, “Warp Music Publishing U.S”, …
currently unrelated to
Warp Music Ltd. (Publisher) - disambiguation “Warp Publishing”, alias “Warp Music Publishing”
has subsidiary Warp Songs US (Publisher)

This is a bit chaotic :roll_eyes:

Although Warp has a Wikipedia article and 2 active domains (record company/label, publisher, there is little information “about” - no company names, not even an address (contact via mail or social media), though their address can be found elsewhere: Spectrum House, 32-34 Gordon House Road, London. A search using the company names returns quite old company registration entries, but they moved only once. :slight_smile:

My main problem: I don’t know how to use label types and label-label relationships.
The record company is probably Warp Records Limited (including company type) ← is this a Holding or Original production?
What’s with Warp Records? It is mostly used synonymously with the record company, for copyrights, etc., but also for the label (on Discogs) - on MB Warp should be used instead (as on the logo - an “imprint”?). Where should Warp Records be placed between the record company and the imprint? Which label type is it? Should it be merged? Merged into what?

For the publisher, I would suggest merging them all and all names as aliases - unless I find out in which order they were renamed into each other (I’m not sure if that’s possible).

Both, record company/label and publisher have a US branch, but this most likely belongs to the same company.

There’s no urgency to fix this (it’s just a relatively simple example), but I generally have a problem with it:
I still do not know how to use label types and parent-subsidiary relationships correctly, especially where to put company brand names between company and release label. And in particular, I can’t distinguish when a label is imprint or subsidiary.


Do you know you can search UK limited companies here:

Incorporated 1993… and a few addresses old and new

1 Like

No, I wasn’t aware, but I found this one with Google too :slight_smile:
(thanks, I bookmarked the advanced search)

This company has no complicated structure, but still I struggle with the relationships

→ There are 2 companies
WARP RECORDS LIMITED Sound recording and music publishing activities
WARP MUSIC LIMITED Sound recording and music publishing activities
same address
The “nature of business” is not very helpful, but we already know what they do :smiley:

→ Warp Films is an independent company
WARP FILMS LIMITED Motion picture production activities, Television programme production activities
(now we know …thanks again)
→ Warp X (Music Videos) has the same address in Sheffield (c/o Warp Films Ltd)
WARP X LIMITED Motion picture production activities

It’s great! - in Austria you have to pay if you want to look up the official Östereichische Firmenbuch (company name and address is free - for more details…)
Just noticed: for the enclosed documents you have to pay too - but at leat there are more details than in Austria

The UK Companies House link can be real useful in many ways. You get to see renaming, dates, addresses. Also the owners. And the various changes over the years.