There are a number of companies that make an effort to distribute Asian movies in the Europe. That is a good thing, but... when it comes to parsing data into a DVDprofile profile I am running into a bit of a question. Especially these three labels, that in themselves do not appear to be a company.

We use the "Edition" field for blatant tag lines on top of the front cover like "Special collector's edition" and similar. Fine.
We use "media company" for the companies that are responsible for a distribution in a locality. Fine. (BTW, for finer definitions, see the Invelos contribution rules).

Now here is the problem. A number of advertising labels like "Asiamania" are stored in the edition field in existing profiles. But similar advertising labels like "Amasia" and "Hong Kong Legends" are used in the studio and MC fields. Also, these labels are printed on the covers as logo's rather than a traditional Edition banner. But these are NOT, as far as I can see, separately existing companies, but just labels and/or trademarks.
For instance, on the NL release of "Heart of the Dragon" (8715664-016473) the back cover specifically says "Hong Kong Legends and HKL logo are trademarks of The Contender Entertainment Group". Trademark, not a separate company as the rules stipulate. But HKL is named as studio or MC in numerous profiles.
For an example of "Amasia", apparently a trademark of Splendid Films active in Germany and the Netherlands, see "Blood Letter" (4013549-039567) where Amasia is 'just' a mini-logo on the front. Amasia is named in the profile as a MC.
For an example of "Asiamania" see "Breaking News" see NL release 9789085-141334 where Total Fim is the company involved (and so MC). Asiamania is defined as an Edition text.

To me, it seems all a very inconsistent bunch in the current database.

So what should I do? All three labels as Editions, except when there are specific banners like Special Collector's Edition and the like? Or register these as MC's as a 'label' or 'trademark' is just the MC by another name? But in the latter case, to refer to one of the examples above, it would register the same company, like Splendid Films and Amasia, twice...

I believe some or perhaps all of these "labels" would fall under "secondary publishers" which are allowed as MCs under the rules.

I find it a personal choice whether to also list them in the edition field. Some of them, like Hong Kong Legends, could definitely be viewed as a "collection". And since The Criterion Collection is mentioned as an example of a valid ediition, I don't see why this wouldn't be allowed. But I wouldn't want to enforce any method on the online, I just set my editions and lock them.

Good luck with that. 

Personally, I think the only valid reason for using the edition field is the part that reads "ensure it will help distinguish between different releases of the same title.". If it doesn't, why bother.