Logical reasoning PrepTest 143 · Section 1 · Question 10

Incorrect. The argument doesn't refer to inconsistency in aims to justify the conclusion, so this answer is out of scope. It's also about a statute being justified, not written in a certain way.

Incorrect. First, the author doesn't call for the repeal of any copyright statutes, just concluding that the current statute is unjustified—since she believes that some copyright is warranted, it might be enough to alter the existing statute. Second, there's no indication that the conditions justifying the initial statute have changed.

Incorrect. The argument is specifically about the countries where copyright outlives the creator by several decades, so it doesn't rely on "exporting" this statute to other countries.

Incorrect. The argument is about the balance of costs and benefits, not a balancing of rights.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
Background Ð Some level of copyright is justified, but it carries costs with it.
Current laws (some countries) Ð Protect a work for life of author plus several decades
Argument Ð Since the benefit of these extra years is lower than the cost, the protection in current laws is too long

Answer Anticipation:
Did this question make you want to study copyright law?

While there aren't many questions on copyright law specifically, the reasoning here follows a common pattern—balancing the costs against the benefits. Here, the author concludes that a specific piece of the current copyright law (the additional decades that some countries protect work after the death of the author) isn't justified. Why? Because the "societal benefit...is more than offset by the societal cost." In other words, the cost to society is higher than the benefit to society.

However, the argument never establishes that the balance of societal costs is the metric by which legislation should be determined. So this argument is relying on the principle that legislation shouldn't cost society more than it benefits society.

Answer Explanation:
This answer establishes that if societal benefits don't exceed societal costs—as the argument states certain lengthy copyright terms don't—then the statute isn't justified. That connects the premise to the conclusion, and thus this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Strengthen (Principle) questions justify the conclusion of the argument based on the stated premises. The correct answer should almost directly mirror the argument.