so, I’ve got a bit of an odd situation on this release…
as y’all may know, A&R is a release group relationship. however, these A&R credits seem to be specific to the Diamond Edition of the release group in question. should I add these to the release group, even though it only applies to some of the releases in the group?
there’s no booklet scans for the standard edition yet, so I’m not sure if the non-Diamond Edition A&R credits are on those releases…
Same problem as Relationship Type / Phonographic copyright - MusicBrainz - the relationship doesn’t apply to all releases. Probably the same solution too.
(I ignore this kind of nebulous / conditionally incorrect data.)
Usually I do not add them at all, but I think it only applies to the production of the album, even if it’s printed on a later release only.
I don’t think so. Phonographic copyright is registered at a certain date. It can be renewed and in these cases a second or third ℗ date + company should be added. I’m not sure in cases where only the company name was changed due to the acquisition of the original company (without renewed copyright).
I’m not going to bother fishing out the examples, but there are many examples of releases released in different markets at the same time that credit a different company. Facts aren’t up for debate.
The point is that I don’t want this nebulous / conditionally incorrect information listed on releases that didn’t say that, just like I don’t want remastered ISRCs attached to my files if those ISRCs come from a different release. So I might submit the data, but I’d never consume it from MusicBrainz because it lacks precision.
In case I have doubts I do not add it either.
That’s how a recording is currently defined on MB: remasters are the same recording, therefore ISRCs from remastered editions belong to the recording. … but that’s actually also off-topic 
slightly related, but I made a ticket for this kind of relationship. in the meantime, I’ll probably add it as a Miscellaneous support relationship…
