Whispering:

I presume you are referring to Cast. As usual the Rules provide the answer

If an actor is credited by name but does not have an associated role, you may use the film itself, or another source to identify the role. However, mass copy from a third party commercial database which violates their stated usage license is not allowed. In each case, list Actor’s names and roles (when given) exactly as they are in the credits and in exactly the same order credited.

There are a number of tricks that can be used and that i use here. For example, let's say you go to a source and they list a role as Gen. Beauregard Smith, I would probably list General Beauregard Smith or General Smith. Or maybe they might have Joe, the chauffeur. I would list him as Joe. Another thing I do if the film has any roles listed is pay attention to how the filmmakers formatted those roles and maintain that format.

Skip

As has been noted, for cast, it is perfectly fine to use an outside source if no roles are given in the film credits.  Crew, however, is another story.  Ken has recently stated that the films official site would be fine but, I am guessing, a 3rd party source would not.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
As has been noted, for cast, it is perfectly fine to use an outside source if no roles are given in the film credits.  Crew, however, is another story.  Ken has recently stated that the films official site would be fine but, I am guessing, a 3rd party source would not.

Some list cast on general groups, e.g. the last movie i watched had cast as:

Teachers
(~10 names)

Schoolgirls
(~10 names)

Schoolboys
(~5 names)

Others
(~20 names)

I think with the new dividers of the actual beta it could get a bit better:
http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=423519
(Not tested personnel)

But I think if you can find rolenames this would be also Ok.

I agree with what our fellow users have already stated. Additionally, I'd like to point out that this particular database does not seem to be a commercial database as mentioned in Skip's quote from the Contribution Rules.

I beg to differ. If this issue related to local issues only, it would not be mentioned in the contribution rules. And the rules state that "mass copy from a third party commercial database which violates their stated usage license is not allowed". This is not a commercial database and therefore is not covered by this part of the rules - that's all I'm saying.

Whether mass copy would violate their license is a different issue altogether, which I can't judge (there are no terms of use on the website as far as I can see). So there may be other reasons to avoid mass copy than that particular part of the contribution rules. In that sense, I generally agree with your statement "better safe than sorry".

Just checked out the site, using "Inglorious Basterds" as test.

It seems that the basic principle of the site doesn't differ too much from IMDb.
Means the data gets contributed by more or less trustworthy contributors.
The great difference is that by "Show all Contributors" you'd be able to identify who contributed what.

I'm not sure about the evaluation system, so I'd rank this site as "Not entirely trustworthy"

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
How is this not a commercial database, amigo. Ken has every right to license the data wwe provide to outside sources, providing another income stream for Invelos. We don't know whether he is or is not, that is his business and his opportunity, were I he, i would absolutely bei doing so. And that my friend would very clearly make it commercial. I don't know what ken does in this regard and i don't care, but there is absolutely no sense in grabbing some tiger's tail just to see if it will scratch, bite or KILL you. Leave the tigers alone that way you are sure not to get killed...by a tiger.

Skip

I believe dee1959jay was refering to the site that Whispering linked to when he said it wasn't a commercial database.

That being said, until Dee Jay posted the rule, I didn't realize it was worded the way it is.  Unfortunately, that wording creates a loophole large enough to drive a truck through...that loophole being, if the site is not commercial, and mass copying does not violate their stated usage license, they can be used as a source.  If that isn't what Ken wants, and I don't believe it is, he needs to change the rule to "mass copy from a third party database is not allowed."