I am thinking that one could establish the AACR2 "corporate" name as 110 2_ Don Pendleton (Firm) .  That's what I would probably do, if I could assure myself that this is a business entity.

It reminds me a little of printers/booksellers during the hand-press era. Sometimes when they died, the business might be carried on as “Heirs of <so and so>.” And while alive, they might assign the copyright to other printers, and the imprint might read, for example, Printed for the Assigns of J. Sowle.

According to LCRI 24.1A, the heirs, assigns, and estate of a printer is established as a corporate body, with reciprocal links on the NARs between the personal and the corporate entities. Not exactly the same; I gather the franchised name still presents itself as a personal name, so it’s not quite as straightforward, but the principle of treating one as a person and the other as a corporation—with appropriate links—should carry over.

Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Head of Cataloging, Folger Shakespeare Library

[log in to unmask] | 202.675-0369 | www.folger.edu

It’s an interesting problem, but it seems the line between the original author and the franchise is sometimes a blurry one and may not be resolvable into distinct identities. At one end, the authors start off writing their own stuff, demand increases and they begin subcontracting to ghost writers, and finally only the ghostwriters survive. http://www.julieglover.com/2011/09/who-wrote-it-author-franchises.html

Ed Jones

Off hand, I would say that the entity writing under the “franchised name” is not the same entity as the person who originally owned the name. The new, separate, entity’s name is a pseudonym, probably a collective pseudonym. As a separate entity it should have a separate authority record with its own unique access point form, and that form should be linked to the new works being produced under the pseudonym. As to exactly what that form should be, perhaps this needs to be addressed in RDA. At present it isn’t possible to add a qualifier like “franchised name” to a personal name access point—at least I don’t see any justification for it in RDA 9.19. Perhaps this entity’s date of birth is 1995? In any case I do not think the same access point should be used for the franchised name and the person Don Pendleton since they are, in fact, different entities. It doesn’t matter whether the access point for the original Don Pendleton has dates or not—it still represents a different entity.

Bob

Hello,

I would like some advice regarding franchised names.  

The example I am looking at is

NAR  n  87930300 

Pendleton, Don, $d1927-1995.

The NAR contains biographical information confirming the death date of 1995.  It also contains information stating that the name has been franchised and books are still being published under the name Don Pendleton.

What I am wondering is whether the dates on this NAR should be removed since there are still new works being published under this name?

I have obtained a date of birth for the other Don Pendleton, NAR no2008070134, so that record would not conflict if this was done.

Thanks for sharing your expertise,

Linda Woodcock

Linda Woodcock
NACO Canada Funnel Coordinator / Technical Services Librarian

Coast Capital Savings Library
Kwantlen Polytechnic University
t 604.599.2450 f 604.599.2303 e [log in to unmask]