PrepTest 130, Section 2, Question 20
Proponents of the tangible-object theory of copyright argue(461 more words not shown)
It can be inferred that(15 more words not shown)
- ATheorists who suggest(23 more words not shown)
- BIf a work(22 more words not shown)
- CUnder existing statutes,(27 more words not shown)
- DAn adequate theoretical(18 more words not shown)
- EIt is common,(17 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
The author's main position is that the tangible-object explanation isn't enough. That gives us a starting point, but the answer may ask for a more specific implication of the criticism. Check which claim follows from the reasons the author actually gives.
Working the answers
- A
The author doesn't reject retained rights or accuse their supporters of misunderstanding every transfer of property. The objection is to using physical ownership alone to explain intellectual property.
- B
The author challenges a theory for failing to accommodate a live broadcast, rather than concluding that such a work has no valid claim to protection. This takes the limitation of the theory as a limitation on copyright itself.
- C
We aren't told what existing statutes generally permit regarding ownership of abstract ideas. This changes a theoretical discussion into a claim about current law.
- DCorrect
In the poet example, the author says the poet seems to have no ground for claiming copyright unless the poet already owns the ideas expressed. That supports the inference that a satisfactory justification would likely need the creator's original ownership of those ideas. It addresses precisely what the physical-object account leaves out.
- E
The author uses the standard assumption that live broadcasts can be copyrighted to challenge the theory. Calling that assumption incorrect would remove the objection instead of expressing it.
More Author's Opinion questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Author's Opinion questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.