PT126.S2.P1.Q1 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Often when a highly skilled and experienced employee leaves one company to work for another, there is the potential for a transfer of sensitive information between competitors. ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ████ █████ ██████ ███████████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██████████████ ███████████ ████ ███ █████ █████████████ ███ █████ ██ ███████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██████████ ███ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██ █████ ██████████ ███

Problem · When employees change companies, they might take trade secrets with them

One principle - companies have right to their own intellectual property. Another principle - people can seek other employment and freely use their own abilities. These appear irreconcilable.

Courts' solution · Allow employees to change companies, but order employees not to disclose former employer's secrets

One critique · Court's solution doesn't protect employees' rights

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

Author's critique · Court's solution doesn't protect trade secrets

The transition "but it is also doubtful..." tells us that the author will focus on this critique. She won't focus on the other one.

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

Support for Author's Critique · Employees can't separate expertise they gained from prior employment

However, companies might claim that part of that expertise involves intellectual property.

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

Support for Author's Critique · Court orders don't stop subsconscious use of trade secrets

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

Concession · Court orders, in theory, prohibit subconcious use of trade secrets ("leakage")

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

Author's response to concession · Hard to enforce prohibition against leakage

There won't be much evidence of subconscious use of secrets (because it's subconscious). And, it's hard to distinguish legitimate skill developed independently by employees from skill acquired through secrets.

Author's main point · Court orders prohibiting disclosure of secrets are unlikely to be effective

Passage Style

Critique or debate

Problem-analysis

Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ █████ ██ ███ ████████

Question Type

Main point

In a Problem-Analysis passage, if the author discusses a solution, the main point will capture that solution and the author’s opinion about it (if any). Here, the author discusses the common solution of a court injunction against the disclosure of employee secrets. The author argues that these injunctions are unlikely to be effective in preserving trade secrets.

There are more █████████ ████ ████ █████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ████ █ █████████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████████ ████████ ███ ████████████ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██ █████ ██████████

The author doesn’t discuss any other ways that are more effective than court injunctions. Although the author doesn’t believe injunctions are effective, we don’t know whether are better ways to protect intellectual property rights and a person’s right to make free use of their abilities.

Court injunctions must ██ ████████████ ██ ████ ███ ██ ██████ █ ████████ █████ ██ ██████████ █████████████ █████ ████████

The author doesn’t advocate for the strengthening of court injunctions or suggest that they need to be strengthened. She simply criticizes court injunctions as a way to protect trade secrets that aren’t in the form of documents and other concrete items.

Enforcement of court ███████████ ████████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████████ ██████ ████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████

Too strong. The author never suggests that enforcement of injunctions is “impossible.” She notes that certain difficulties make enforcement more difficult, and that an injunction is “unlikely” to protect trade secrets that aren’t in the form of documents and other concrete items.

Court injunctions prohibiting █████████ ████ ██████████ ██████ ██████████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ██ █████ ████████ ███████████

This best captures the author’s main point, which is that court injunctions against disclosure of trade secrets are unlikely to be effective in preserving trade secrets. The author expresses this point directly at the end of P1 and provides reasoning to support it in P2 and P3.

96%

The rights of █████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██ █████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████████ ███ █████ █████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ███████████ ████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ █████ ████████

Although the author does believe that employees’ rights are limited by court injunctions, the main point doesn’t relate to employees’ rights. Rather, it relates to whether injunctions against disclosure can protect a company’s trade secrets.

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

PrepTest 126 - Section 2 - Passage 1 - Question 1

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action

PrepTest 126 - Section 2 - Passage 1 - Question 1

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Want to know why the right answer is right?