| Cataloging Practices Manual | [CPM-6851] |
|---|
Background
When searching for cataloging copy the first objective is to determine whether any record found matches the video in hand. If a matching record is found in CLIO, OCLC or RLIN and is found to be standard it can be used for cataloging. The identification of standard cataloging copy is discussed separately in CPM-010 (for records found in CLIO), CPM-011 (for records found in OCLC) and CPM-012 (for records found in RLIN).
To determine whether cataloging copy matches the item in hand it is generally only necessary to examine the 2XX, 3XX and 4XX/8XX fields in the bibliographic record.
Procedure
Compare the following fields of the MARC bibliographic record to the video in hand. Use information found on the container and the video label (or printed on the disc itself); it is not necessary to view the video to determine whether or not copy matches. In order for a record to be considered a match all of the fields listed below must match. If even one does not match it is necessary to use a different record, or create one through variant edition cataloging.
The words in the 245 field must exactly match the video in hand (if there are typographical errors in the 245 it is still a match and the errors will be corrected). It is not necessary for the punctuation to match.
The edition statement on the video must match exactly the statement in the 250.
As long as any place name from the video appears in the record, consider it a match. If the record has more place names than the video, it's a match.
If this subfield contains the most unique element of a commercial publisher's name, consider it to be a match, even if the name appears in a shorter form than the one on the video.
There will be cases, particularly with commercially released versions of motion pictures, where several records will exist online with the only difference being the copyright date. For many of these videos, the only date given in the 260 $c is the copyright date, since the copyright date is usually the sole date on the piece, and in such cases LC calls for using the copyright date as a stand-in for the publication date. Strictly following the rules then, one is obliged to create a new record for the video every time the copyright date changes.
While other libraries have been technically correct to input these multiple records for the same title, the situation is more closely analogous to that of printing dates in the books format. Where multiple records exist in response to different copyright dates, use the record with the earliest copyright date that in all other regards matches the video you have in hand.
EXAMPLE: You have a videocassette of "It's a Wonderful Life", issued by Viking Entertainment and dated c1992. In OCLC, you find:
It's a wonderful life [videorecording] / an RKO radio release. Burbank, CA
: Viking Entertainment, c1985. 1 videocassette (129 min.) : sd., b&w ; 1/2 in.
[VIDEORECORDING] OCLC: 19379131
It's a wonderful life [videorecording] / Liberty Films. Burbank CA : Viking
Entertainment, c1986. 1 videocassette (129 min.) : sd., b&w ; 1/2 in.
[VIDEORECORDING] OCLC: 15612381
It's a wonderful life [videorecording] / Liberty Films. Burbank CA : Viking
Entertainment, c1988. 1 videocassette (129 min.) : sd., b&w ; 1/2 in.
[VIDEORECORDING] OCLC: 22730985
Consider the 1985 record to be a match, as long at it matches in all other respects. In case of doubt, consult supervisor.
The 300 field must match in all respects, except for a minor difference in the running time. Ignore the absence or presence of subfield e for accompanying material when determining whether or not the physical description is a match.
The absence or presence of a series statement should be ignored in determining whether or not cataloging copy matches.
Return to CPM Table of Contents