Contribution Guidelines Update: Regional Company Pages

  • 6
  • Announcement
  • Updated 10 months ago
  • (Edited)
We’d like to announce a clarification to the contribution guidelines for companies and company filmographies. Companies should not have separate IMDb pages for each region they have distribution or sales credits in. If a certain company has distribution or sales credits in more than one region, then those credits should all appear on a single page.

Cases in which there should be more than one separate company pages:

  • When two companies are completely different companies and are not affiliated in any way.
  • When two companies are affiliated but different companies. For example, Lionsgate [US] (registered as Lions Gate Entertainment Corp.), is an American entertainment company, currently headquartered in Santa Monica, California. There is a different company called Lionsgate UK [GB],(formerly Redbus Film Distribution, and briefly known as Helkon SK between 2001and 2003), which is a British subsidiary of Lionsgate [US].
Cases in which there should be only a single company page:

  • When there is more than one page for the same company. This includes when a company has multiple pages that simply represent the fact that the same company once distributed or sold in that region. For example, Lionsgate [US] distributed A Simple Favor (2018) in Ireland, so this credit should be listed on Lionsgate [US] and not a separate page called Lionsgate [IE] (as such we will be moving this credit over in the near future).
As per the pre-existing guideline, company country codes should continue to reflect the company’s headquarters. For example, Lionsgate [US] is currently headquartered in Santa Monica, California, United States. It should (and does) therefore have the country code [US] in its name.

Over the coming months we will be merging these different regional pages into a single page for each company. For example, there are currently 26 different regional pages for Netflix, such as Netflix [US], Netflix [ES], Netflix [JP] etc. We will merge Netflix [ES], Netflix [JP] etc. into the single Netflix [US] page, as that’s where Netflix’s headquarters is.

To stop these regional pages being generated going forward, we have created a new warning in the contribution form: "A company's regional distribution and sales credits should all be added to the same single company page. Please do not create separate company pages for each region a company has distributed or sold in."

We have also updated the following pages in our contribution guides:

Please note that the regional data for distribution and sales credits will continue to be captured in the “region” attribute for each individual credit. Likewise, the regional data for Production credits will continue to be captured in the “country of origin” data for the relevant title. Regional information for these credits will therefore be preserved with this change. For example, A Simple Favor (2018) was distributed by Lionsgate [US] in both the United States and Ireland, so Lionsgate [US] and A Simple Favor (2018) will share two separate company filmography items; one with the attributes “Distributor (2018)(Theatrical) (United States)”, and another with the attributes “Distributor (2018) (Theatrical) (Ireland)”. Therefore we will still capture the fact that Lionsgate distributed the title in both regions.

We are aware that this will present some new challenges in viewing the data, in some scenarios. For example, Title Reference View currently displays the company-level country code next to each company’s credits, as opposed to the region attribute of the credit. This is a known issue that we realize will be compounded by this change and we have a ticket open for it.

We’re also aware that many contributors rely on Company Search Pages. You will no longer be able to use this page to view the distribution or sales credits a company has within only a specified region. If you rely heavily on the regional separation of credits on this page, then please let us know with a reply on this thread.

Please do also let us know with a reply on this thread if you have any other questions or concerns.
Photo of Rida

Rida, Employee

  • 167 Posts
  • 252 Reply Likes

Posted 10 months ago

  • 6
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 8225 Posts
  • 10728 Reply Likes
What I would still be unsure about, as a contributor, is how to tell the difference between a subsidiary which is a separate company and a branch which is not.
Photo of Elwood Blues

Elwood Blues

  • 59 Posts
  • 85 Reply Likes
Regarding the "When two companies are affiliated but different companies." part: this should be further explained. If you take Warner Bros. as an example, their German subsidiary Warner Bros. Entertainment GmbH is registered in Hamburg (see That subsidiary (and not the US parent) is also the company which applies for ratings from the FSK (similar to the BBFC with Warner Bros Entertainment UK Ltd.). So, is this a case of separate or single company pages?
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 4018 Posts
  • 5223 Reply Likes
Hi Elwood Blues,

Good example. The guideline we're announcing here does not dictate that subsidiaries (separate affiliated companies) should be merged. However, do you know how many regions Warner Bros. has a distribution subsidiary in? Is it all the regions they've ever distributed in? We want the data to be as easy as possible for users to navigate, while still capturing all the important information. We'd therefore like to avoid having 45 separate pages for all the regions.Thanks!

Hi Peter,

In most cases we've found that company websites indicate this (e.g. Elwood Blues' example: You can also often find a country's company register online, for example:;jsessionid=912F173010C092942B1021641B4FEE4F.web04-1. Please let us know if you would suggest any other resources. We'll compile these various tips and include them in the contribution guide.
Photo of Marco


  • 1653 Posts
  • 2119 Reply Likes
We’re also aware that many contributors rely on Company Search Pages. You will no longer be able to use this page to view the distribution or sales credits a company has within only a specified region.

So how would this be done in the new situation?
Photo of Rida

Rida, Employee

  • 167 Posts
  • 252 Reply Likes
Hi Marco -

For those with accounts, we recommend referencing the company pages on IMDbPro for this purpose. Please do let us know if you don’t have an IMDbPro account, or if you foresee any issues with this approach.

Photo of Marco


  • 1653 Posts
  • 2119 Reply Likes
or if you foresee any issues with this approach.

It seems IMDb has removed a feature from the the free, regular IMDb to the non-free, non-regular IMDbPro. That's not a step in the right direction if you ask me. So are there any plans to tackle this issue?
Photo of Bulma PunkRocker

Bulma PunkRocker

  • 180 Posts
  • 225 Reply Likes
Thank you for this information.
I may be one of the few contributors that submit every Netflix release as Netflix [us]. I even look up for the main company owner in cases of Latin American cable tv channels, I submit the main company and add the channel name as additional info. I hope that's the right way to do it.
Photo of FangsNL


  • 7 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes

I’m still a bit wary about this massive merge of companies. I can understand it’s not preferred to have numerous company pages for all the different regions, but I feel a lot of data is being or has been merged that should remain separate.

For instance, I’ve noticed that several FOX channels have also been merged. Fox [gb] has been merged with Fox Network [us], but it’s not the same channel. Among others, the Swedish, German, Japanese, Italian, Finnish, and Hungarian channels have all been merged with Fox [ar]. Why everything has been merged into the Argentinian Fox is a mystery to me, but now it’s a complete mess: Swedish theatrical credits are mixed with Japanese home entertainment credits and German, Finnish, Italian and Hungarian television credits.

Moreover, at least the German and the UK FOX channels are separate companies/subsidiaries: and


The same situation is applicable for FOX [nl], which is currently still listed as a separate company, which – in my opinion – it should remain! It is exploited by the Dutch company Eredivisie Media & Marketing CV, which is only partly owned by the Fox Networks Group: (in Dutch).