On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Mary Mastraccio wrote: > Providing personal information in authorized forms of a name is an > issue, because authors complain. The initial point of complaint, then, since we are talking about theses, should be with the requirement of a printed vita. If it is not a requirement but appears by author-choice, then those authors providing them have no basis for complaint. If they are simply given the opportunity to provide vita and don't question it, then what do you say? > One of the concerns is identity theft. Actually, that remains a speculation until an experiment or example proves a definite need for concern. We are all given enough things to fear (and get angry about) everyday. Having to censor a million existing authority records is not a fear I want to carry around without justification (not just speculation). Is there an existing law that could be revised so that we need not always fear being threatended by lawsuits? > I'm not too concerned about 670 fields because this is usually not > available to the public They are certainly available in the LC file, so perhaps we should jump on our Governnment (again) to keep the information secret and unobtainable. We (NACO contributors) could always transfer the liability by saying that our practices are defined by Government policy (we are essentially working for LC, albeit without direct compensation). > and people besides catalogers aren't likely to know to go looking for > the 6xx details in the authority records They (and "honest" data salespersons as well) certainly would if there was any possibility of making money from the 6XX fields. Maybe we need to make the issue more public so that it happens more quickly-- bolster the economy, so to speak. > Perhaps we should consider NOT including mothers name Can't say I've ever seen one like that (in 30 years). Got an example where such information is essential to the record? Thanks! jgm John G. Marr Cataloger CDS, UL Univ. of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131 [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] **There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside the box." Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but sharing is permitted.