PrepTest 123

[lcid:3588] Prep Test 123 LSAT — Reading Comp — S1 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-6  .        In a recent court case, a copy–shop owner was  . accused of violating copyright law when, Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Court case - Facts and point at issue
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Case background:
      • Copy-shop owner charged with copyright violation in making course packs for a local university
    • Owner’s view:
      • The process of getting permission is too difficult, and course packs help students/professors
    • Comparison:
      • Copying for education is generally OK, but in this case , the copy-shop owner making copies for profit

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Copyright law factors; Publisher argument; Ruling
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • List of factors
    • Publishers’ view:
      • Other copy shops won’t pay, lowering the value of the material (one of the factors)
    • Court’s ruling:
      • Sided with the copy-shop owner; educational purposes, plus fee based on copy costs, not material

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • More on the Court’s ruling
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Copy business based on services, not material
    • Professors/students can make copies, so they can pay others to make copies

Main Point: A court recently ruled that a copy-shop that makes copies of copyrighted materials for educational course packs doesn’t violate the copyright in that material since they’re selling services, not the material, and the students/professors who would otherwise copy the material are allowed to do so.

Key Lines?

Lines 1-7 - The basis for the court case

Lines 15-20 - Relevant law and wrinkle in this case

Lines 27-31 - Publisher’s argument

Lines 35-44 - The Court’s ruling

Lines 50-54 - More on the Court’s ruling/reasoning

Meta-Structure?

Reporting a Viewpoint: One common structure that legal studies passages can take is the reporting of a court’s decision. When a single case makes up the entirety of the passage and the author doesn’t weigh in on whether they agree with the court’s decision, we typically find that the Reporting a Viewpoint Meta-Structure applies. And when that’s the case, there are some important pieces of information you should always focus on: the underlying facts/question of law; the arguments from both sides; the court’s ruling; the court’s rationale.

Here, the underlying details are raised in Lines 1-7, suggesting the question, “Can a copy-shop owner legally provide copies of copyrighted educational material to students and professors?” The copy-shop owner’s argument is highlighted in Lines 10-16. The publishers’ arguments show up in Lines 28-31. The rest of the passage goes through the court’s ruling and rationale — this isn’t a violation of copyright law because the shops are selling services, not the copyrighted materials, and the students/professors can legally make copies under the education exception. This ruling and rationale also make up the main point of the passage.

List: Lines 21-27 provide a list of factors relevant in considering a copyright case. This is a limited list that plays into the publishers’ argument and the Court’s ruling, so it’s likely to show up as one or two questions instead of as a central focus of big-picture questions.

Last Thoughts?

This legal passage is actually pretty nice in that it clearly outlines each important element that we should be looking for in such a passage! As such, we should be sure to know where each piece is located so that we can more easily find the relevant information for each question.

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review the publisher’s argument and the court’s rebuttal to it, then find an answer that bolsters the argument directly or addresses the court’s criticism

Answer Anticipation

For this question, there’s one straightforward angle we should take, and another one that we should also consider.The straightforward angle is to review the publisher’s argument, as the correct answer will need to make it stronger. Looking at our notes, we can see the publishers show up in Line 27. There, they argue that if this copy shop can sell these copies without permission, then other copy-shop owners will also stop paying permission fees, and the value of the copyrighted work would go down. An answer choice that makes this possibility more likely would strengthen their argument.However, the other angle we could address is the court’s response to these publishers. As such, another way to strengthen this argument is to address the shortcoming in it that the court identified. Looking at the court’s ruling (starting in Line 31), they ruled that the market value wasn’t sufficiently adversely affected. Our initial anticipation also addressed, this, so this angle didn’t produce a new anticipation. Still, it could have, which means that it’s important to think it through.That said, many things could feasibly strengthen the publishers’ position, so we should keep an open mind as we progress through the answer choices. We'll start by asking ourselves, "Does this strengthen the publishers’ belief that this kind of copying will make their copyrighted materials less valuable?"

Answer choices

  1. A
    Course packs for courses Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this strengthen the publishers’ belief that this kind of copying will make their copyrighted materials less valuable?

    Nope. This answer...doesn't really add anything. Of course, there’s more profit in making more copies. It doesn’t speak to the diminution of the value of the copyrighted materials in the market, nor does it suggest that other copy shops are going to stop paying permission fees.

  2. B
    The copy–shop owner had Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this strengthen the publishers’ belief that this kind of copying will make their copyrighted materials less valuable?

    No. The publishers don’t speak to any type of willful activity on the part of the copy-shop owner, so proving that there was active solicitation of business wouldn’t strengthen their position.

  3. C
    The revenue generated by Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this strengthen the publishers’ belief that this kind of copying will make their copyrighted materials less valuable?

    Without knowing if this had an impact on the sales of the publishers’ works, there’s no way to know if this strengthens their argument that the course packs have diminished the potential market value. Maybe revenue has gone up because the schools in the area drastically expanded enrollment, rather than more students are buying course packs and fewer are buying the original works.

  4. D
    Many area bookstores had Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem

    (D) Does this strengthen the publishers’ belief that this kind of copying will make their copyrighted materials less valuable?

    Yes! This answer brings up a market effect of the course packs - they lower sales of the publishers’ books that include those materials. If that’s the case, it provides an example of the course packs affecting the potential market value of the copyrighted materials, strengthening that claim by the publishers and thus strengthening their argument. This answer is therefore correct.

  5. E
    The publishers had enlisted Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this strengthen the publishers’ belief that this kind of copying will make their copyrighted materials less valuable?

    No. Since it seems as if everyone — including the copy-shop owner — agreed that he didn’t obtain permission, having this fact backed up by more sources doesn’t make the argument any stronger.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion