PT157.S4.P4.Q26

PrepTest 157 - Section 4 - Passage 4 - Question 26

Hide analysis

This passage was adapted from an article published in 1991.

P1

███████ ██ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████████ ██ ███████ ███████ ████████ █████████ ████ ██████ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ██ █████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ █████████ ███████ █ █████ █████████ ██ ███████ ████████████ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ █ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ███████ █████ ██ ████████ █████████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████ █ ███████ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ██ ██████ ██ █ █████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████ ████████████ █████ █████ ████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ █████████ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████████ █████████ ███

Context · Need legal protection against copying software
Copying software programs is easy. Developers would have low financial incentive to innovate if copycatting were legal.
█████ ████ █████ ████████████ █████ ████ █████████ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ ██ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████████████ ████ ███████ ████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ████████████

Other People's (OP) Perspective · Patent protection for software (on top of copyright) is needed to prevent copycatting
Most think copyright has been effective protection; some also want patent.
P2

██ ████████ █████ █████ ██ ████████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ██ ████ ███████████ ██ █████████ ██ ██████ ███████ ██ █ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ███ █ █████ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ████████ █████████████ ██ █████████ ████ ██ █████████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ██ █████████ ██ █ █████████ ███

Context · Software encodes algorithms
Algorithms are a series of steps for doing stuff. They're encoded in software programs in terms that a computer can understand.
██████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██████ ████ ██ █████████ █ ████████ ███ ██ █████████ █ ███████ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █ ████████ ███████ ███████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ███ ██ ████████ █ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ███ ██ █████ ████ █████ ███ █████ ██ ██████ ███████████ ███
OP's Support · OP think encoding algorithms is analogous to designing processes, which are patentable
This is why OP think software should be patentable.
████████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ███████████ ██ ████ ██ █████████ █ ███████ ██ █████████ ███████ █████ ████ █ ███ ██ ██████ ██ █ ███████ ███████ ███ ████████ █████ █ ██████████ ██████████ ████████ ██████ █████ ██ ███████████ ███ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ ███
Requirement for patent · Designs must be product of invention to be patentable
Examples of things that are not inventions: law of nature, logical axiom, general principles (such as the idea that wind can be used to produce energy).
██ ███████ ████████ ████████ ███████████ ███████ ████ █████████ ███████ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ████████ █████████ ██ █████ █████ ███ ██ ██ ███████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████ ███████████

Critique of OPP · Software algorithms should not be patentable
Software algorithms represent principles, which aren't patentable.
P3

███████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████████ █████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ████████ ██ █████████ ████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ █████████████ ███ █████ ███ ███

Main Point · No good reason to extend patent protection to software
███████ ██ ████████ ████████ ██████████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ████████ █████ ██████ █████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ████ ████ ████ █████████████ ██████ ███ ███████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ████ ███████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ██ ██████████ ████ ██ ██ ██ █████ ████████ █████████ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██ █████ ███ ██████████ █████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██████████████████████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██ ███████ █████ ████ ██████████ █████ ██ ████ ███████████ ████████ ████ ████ ██████ ████████████ ██ ████████ █████████ █████ ███ ███ █████████ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ████████ █████ ███████ ██ ██████████

Support · For author's main point
Software is just expression of an idea, which falls within domain of copyright. Only need slight changes to copyright law to adequately protect financial incentive of developers.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Problem-analysis
Show answer
26.

Based on the passage, it ███ ██ ████████ ████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████

a

The sequences of ████████ ████ ███████ █████ █ ████████ ██████████ █████████ ██████████ ███ ████ █████████ █ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██████████ ████

Not supported as a view of the proponents. Although we can infer that they believe an underlying algorithm involves invention, we don’t know that they think sequences of code that express the algorithm involve more inventiveness than the underlying algorithm. You cannot point to a line that provides evidence of the proponents’ view of the inventiveness involved in creating sequences of code.

31%
b

Software algorithms are ███████ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ████████ █████████ ██ █████ █████ ███ ██ ██ ███████ ███ ██ ██████████

Anti-supported. Generic principles are not patentable. So proponents of patent protection for algorithms would believe that algorithms are not generic principles.

8%
c

Patent protection should ████████ █████████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ █████ █████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ████████████ ██ ████████ █████████

Anti-supported. The proponents do not argue that software products should not be protected by copyright. They are in favor of copyright protection. They just want patent protection on top of copyright.

9%
d

Both the algorithms ███ ███ ████████ ███ ██ █████ █ ████████ ███████ █████████ ████ ██████ ███████ █████ ██████████ ███████ ███████ ████████████

Supported. It’s clear that proponents of patent protection want the encoding of algorithms to receive patent protection. What’s more difficult to see is that they also want the algorithms themselves to be protected. There’s no single line that proves this; rather, we need to understand that a central component of the debate between the author and the proponents is the distinction between algorithms and the encoding of algorithms (the sequences of code that express the algorithm). The author argues that the underlying algorithms shouldn’t be patentable. Why would the author say this in response to the proponents if the proponents didn’t have a different view? The implication is that the proponents do believe algorithms should be patentable (in addition to the encoding of algorithms being patentable). The author’s response at the end of P2 would make no sense if the proponents agreed that the algorithms shouldn’t be patentable.

50%
e

As the number ██ █████████ ████████ ███████████ █████████ ██████████ ███████ ███████████ ████ ██████ ████ ███████

We have no evidence of the proponents’ belief about the relationship between the number of programming languages and the prevalence of copycat programming.

1%

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic
More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

Confirm action

Are you sure?