PrepTest 123
[lcid:3591] Prep Test 123 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4
Reading comp
Passage
The World Wide Web, a network of electronically produced and interconnected (or "linked") sites, called pages, that are accessible via
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Legal Studies
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 3.1 (Lines 28-44)
Paragraph 3.1 (Lines 44-55)
Main Point:
Putting a link to a document on another website shouldn't be considered copyright infringement because the copyright owner, by posting it, still controls it and has made it available for distribution.
Key Lines:
Lines 6-9 - One side of a debate
Lines 9-13 - The other side
Lines 23-27 - The central question is posed
Lines 28-30 - A requirement to answer the question
Line 31- An extended analogy is introduced
Lines 40-44 - The Author's answer
Lines 44-46 - Another consideration/support, and an example
Lines 52-55 - Author's opinion on related subject
Meta-Structure:
Question/Answer - The passage focuses on a question posed in Paragraph 2—does linking to a document constitute copyright infringement? Through the use of an extended analogy between phone messages/numbers and the internet (Lines 31-37), the Author concludes that no, it isn't (Lines 40-44). When a passage has a central Question/Answer structure, the Author's answer to the question is the main point of the passage, as we highlighted in our main point above.
Analogy - The Author uses an extended analogy in Lines 31-37 to relate posting a link to a document on another website to giving out someone's phone number. This is all in service of answering the question that's central to the passage.
Add-On - This passage includes an "Add-On" at the end—everything after the "Moreover" in Line 44. This segment of the passage adds to the Author's argument but it doesn't build from the central evidence, instead going off in a bit of a different direction. It reflects her opinion, but not necessarily her main point.
Last Thoughts:
We split up Paragraph 3 for two reasons. First, there are two distinct ideas in there, with the first highlighting an analogy that answers the Author's question, and the second with some additional points she makes relevant to the issue but not the central question. Second, that second half is introduced with "Moreover" (Line 44), which is an interesting structural word. It serves the same purpose as "Besides," in that it's introducing a side consideration that, while relevant, isn't directly speaking to the main point, or, at most, is support for that main point. So while that section of the passage could be asked about, it doesn't have to be reflected in the main point.
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- New technology leads to debate
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- New tech - Internet, linked sites on computers
- IP owners - Without stronger copyright laws, the internet will have a lot of infringement
- Users - Reducing access makes internet less valuable
Paragraph 2
- Paragraph note
- New question/consideration from new tech; current law
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Central issue - website can link to document on another
- Traditional IP protection - Owner can sue distributor for unauthorized copies
- Question - Does linking to a document count as copyright infringement?
Paragraph 3.1 (Lines 28-44)
- Paragraph note
- Analogy leads to answer
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Analogy - Like recording an outgoing message on phone/giving out number
- Author's Answer - No, it doesn't
Paragraph 3.1 (Lines 44-55)
- Paragraph note
- "Moreover"; Technique available to protect doc you put online; recommendation
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Example - Password (somewhat limit open access, but not as much as copyright law changes)
- Author - Copyright law shouldn't be changed, as it would hurt the internet
Main Point:
Putting a link to a document on another website shouldn't be considered copyright infringement because the copyright owner, by posting it, still controls it and has made it available for distribution.
Key Lines:
Lines 6-9 - One side of a debate
Lines 9-13 - The other side
Lines 23-27 - The central question is posed
Lines 28-30 - A requirement to answer the question
Line 31- An extended analogy is introduced
Lines 40-44 - The Author's answer
Lines 44-46 - Another consideration/support, and an example
Lines 52-55 - Author's opinion on related subject
Meta-Structure:
Question/Answer - The passage focuses on a question posed in Paragraph 2—does linking to a document constitute copyright infringement? Through the use of an extended analogy between phone messages/numbers and the internet (Lines 31-37), the Author concludes that no, it isn't (Lines 40-44). When a passage has a central Question/Answer structure, the Author's answer to the question is the main point of the passage, as we highlighted in our main point above.
Analogy - The Author uses an extended analogy in Lines 31-37 to relate posting a link to a document on another website to giving out someone's phone number. This is all in service of answering the question that's central to the passage.
Add-On - This passage includes an "Add-On" at the end—everything after the "Moreover" in Line 44. This segment of the passage adds to the Author's argument but it doesn't build from the central evidence, instead going off in a bit of a different direction. It reflects her opinion, but not necessarily her main point.
Last Thoughts:
We split up Paragraph 3 for two reasons. First, there are two distinct ideas in there, with the first highlighting an analogy that answers the Author's question, and the second with some additional points she makes relevant to the issue but not the central question. Second, that second half is introduced with "Moreover" (Line 44), which is an interesting structural word. It serves the same purpose as "Besides," in that it's introducing a side consideration that, while relevant, isn't directly speaking to the main point, or, at most, is support for that main point. So while that section of the passage could be asked about, it doesn't have to be reflected in the main point.
Question prompt
Based on the passage,
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: C
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Legal
Strategy Overview
Review what the passage says about the relationship between these two options, then create a generalization that we can apply to the answers
Answer Anticipation
Strengthening copyright law is brought up in Line 8 — it was what IP owners wanted to do to protect their copyrighted materials online. Passwords are brought up in Line 46 as an example of an existing way that copyright owners can protect their IP online.
It would be easy to take this information and work with it, but that would be making our jobs harder! The passage itself talks about the relationship between the two options, comparing their restrictiveness in Lines 49—51 — a comparison that we should have noted. There, it says that passwords do restrict access, but not as much as the threat of litigation that would come from stronger copyright laws.
So let's find an answer that has a similar relationship — a first option that limits something strongly using laws, and a second option that limits it less so using other mechanisms.
Answer choices
-
Aallowing everyone use of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. Neither of the two methods of protecting IP is akin to allowing everyone to use a public facility. That's analogous to what the users of the web are calling for — no restrictions on access. -
Boutlawing the use of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. Tempting answer! Outlawing a drug is more restrictive than outlawing its sale. But, in this case, both options involve making something illegal, whereas the stimulus had one option involving laws and another involving other protective measures. -
Cprohibiting a sport and Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C matches the stem
Correct. Prohibiting a sport is analogous to changing copyright law to prevent websites from linking to documents on other websites — both use the law to ban an activity. Putting a password on your website is akin to relying on people to wear proper safety gear — both provide protection, and both are adopted by the people who need the protection. This answer's elements are analogous to the ones in the question stem, so this is the correct answer. -
Dpassing a new law Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. Strengthening copyright law certainly could involve passing a new law (though that's less an analogy and more . . . just the same thing), but passwords aren't akin to enforcing the law. Copyright lawsuits would match up with that (though, again, as an example of it, not as an analogy for it). -
Eallowing unrestricted entry to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. This answer is analogous to (A), and it's wrong for the same reasons.
What this tests
Discussion
-
E? 1 reply
Started by LillCarr