It seems that copyright holder is a legal relationship with very little bibliographic significance. Moreover, it's a relationship that is potentially volatile and has the possibility of being out of date soon after the statement's appearance. The relationship between the resource and the museum as described within the content of the resource itself is what is of bibliographic significance.
Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu<mailto:k...@northwestern.edu> (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978! From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Lynne LaBare, Senior Librarian/Cataloger Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:08 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator J. McRee Elrod wrote: Yes, if the Museum is 264 1 $b. The 264 field appears as: 264 1 |a Buffalo, N.Y. :|b Firefly Books, |c 2013. In this case, do I simply add the corporate name heading (access point) without any relationship designator even though the Natural History Museum holds the copyright and appears in the title? I found the term "copyright holder" [cph] in the MARC Code List for Relators (http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaterm.html) , but am I correct in my understanding that we should avoid using these terms in RDA bib records if possible? Lynne J. LaBare Senior Librarian, Cataloger Provo Library at Academy Square 550 North University Avenue Provo, Utah 84601-1618 801.852.7672 801.852.6670 (fax) Email: lyn...@provo.lib.ut.us<mailto:lyn...@provo.lib.ut.us> [Description: library logo color white backgroundSMALL]
<<inline: image001.jpg>>
