Yes, I thought about asking the licensees for a list of approved licensors: in this case it's actually Transit Film, acting on behalf of FWMS. The simple fact is that I have to draw the line somewhere. That article's taken hundreds of hours to compile; it's nearly 7,000 words long and the quantity in emails I wrote while preparing it would easily double that. What's more, I'm currently preparing a supplemental article for a bunch of stuff I couldn't fit in that one!
The same goes for my bootlegs article: hundreds of hours of work, most of it not on the page, but it's having the desired effect. Of course, in numerous chat forums, deniers who happily buy them kept asking me to contact the pirates and ask them for proof of their licences before accusing them. I repeatedly reminded the pirate supporters that they could ask their fave companies themselves but strangely, no one bothered... Fact is, I've seen lots of actual documentation and been given lots of largely unprintable info (for legal reasons) from the companies and individuals being ripped off - and that's been more than enough to satisfy me and know that my arse is covered legally.
So James, if you'd like to contact Transit it would be great; I'll happily publish the results of anything you uncover.
Have just had another thought: I see you removed the note about the second disc of the first Eureka DVD being in B&W. How about adding a note reflecting what my footnotes say, re it actually being partially tinted? You could also ask owners of it to check their discs. That's one particular little mystery I'd love to clear up!
