I think you're right to group it as Island label... as a little cross referencing with other island releases (with their own formulations of corporate rights ownership/production credits etc.) reveals that the catalogue number gropuing pattern and barcode pattern generally fits into the scheme of those other titles of approximate date...
That is to say, if you click on the blue highlit Island label tag at the top, it fits into the scheme of that label's barcode/cat patterns (Make any sense?).
Just imagine what a nightmare it would be in the instance of a contractual dispute between any of the labels/corporations listed on any given title, should they arise.
The lawyers would have their work cut out to decipher who owns what, where, when, and why!
It is both surreal and ridiculously complicated, like when you watch a film now (As Family Guy observed!) you have about eight different production company idents at the start: X films, and Y films, in association with Z and P productions, under the aegis of C corporoation etc. etc.
Surely they can't keep this up for too much longer before the whole business model collapses?
Welcome to the world of major labels' multi-layered corporate structures! I think at the lowest level, Island and Lioness are yer actual labels; Island Records Group is a division of the record company that looks are Island, Lioness, and probably others; Universal-Island Records Ltd. is said record company, one of the autonomous companies within Universal Music Operations Ltd. (similar to how, say, Atlantic Recording Corporation sits within Warner Music Group in the USA). Or something like that. (Or something else entirely.)
label(s) appear to be island lioness, island records group, and universal island records, a division of universal music operations ltd. however, the copyright in this sound recording is owned by universal-island records ltd. is it just me, or is this all getting absurdly surreal?