PT130.S2.P3.Q19 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Proponents of the tangible-object theory of copyright argue that copyright and similar intellectual-property rights can be explained as logical extensions of the right to own concrete, tangible objects. ███

Proponents · of tangible-object theory of copyright

Copyrights and IP are logical extensions of the right to own concrete, tangible objects.

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

Proponents' Premise · Copyrightable works must be manifest in some physical form

If this is a necessary condition for the tangible-object theory, that's a major weakness...

Proponents' Premise · Ownership of object confers a number of rights to owner

E.g., right to hide; display; copy; destroy; transfer.

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

Application · of tangible-object theory

Creating new object from gives all rights to owner. But transferring ownership of object doesn’t necessarily transfer all rights.

General · Retained rights is common in other areas of law

e.g., real estate

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

Application · of retained rights

Original producer of object often retain the rights to copy for profit and to use for creation of derivative works.

Proponents' Claim · Chief advantage of tangible-object theory

It justifies IP rights without relying on ownership of abstract entities.

Author’s Critique · Tangible-object theory cannot apply to non-tangible things

E.g., live broadcast of a sporting event

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

Author’s Critique · Tangible-object theory fails to acknowledge that value is in the idea, not the physical form

Example · The poet v. the transcriber

Reveals weakness in tangible-object theory. Clearly it should be the poet that owns the poem, not the friend who give the poem a tangible form.

Passage Style

Critique or debate

19.

The passage provides the most ███████ ███ █████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ███████████

In most transactions █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████████████ █████████ ██ █████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███████

Unsupported. The passage only briefly mentions non-intellectual property transfer. This part of the text does not tell us how often the seller keeps some ownership rights. We know that it’s possible for the seller to keep some rights, but we don’t know if this happens in most of these transactions.

16%

The notion of ████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ████ █████ █████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████████ █████████

Unsupported. Here, we see that the notion of retained rights is applied to areas of law that don’t involve intellectual property (like real estate); we just don’t know if it’s only these areas of law that involve the notion of retained rights.

Just because the author only chooses to discuss the notion of retained rights in intellectual property in theoretical terms, that doesn’t mean that retained rights aren’t also being applied to intellectual property in real-world law. It is certainly possible that, in current law, the notion of retained rights of ownership is applied to intellectual-property law.

The idea that █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ██ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █ ███████████████ ██████ ██ ████████████ █████████

In order to support (C), we just need to show that it is possible to transfer the right to copy an item for profit under tangible-object theory. We know that when one owns an object, one may transfer ownership of that object. In fact, when you own an object, you can do anything you want with it, as long as it doesn’t violate anyone else’s rights. Nothing in the passage suggests that transferring copyright would violate other people’s rights. This shows that transfer of ownership of the right to copy is certainly compatible with the tangible-object theory.

63%

Ownership of intellectual ████████ ██ ████████████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████████ █████ █████ ████ █████ ████████ █████ ██ █████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ████ ██ █████

Unsupported. We don’t know what happens under many real-world legal systems.

12%

Protection of computer ████████ █████ █████████████████████ ███ ██ ███████████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ████ ██ █ █████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████████ █████████

Unsupported. The passage doesn’t give this kind of restriction for intellectual property protections. From the passage, we can’t infer this kind of necessary condition for protecting computer programs.

PrepTest 130 - Section 2 - Passage 3 - Question 19

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Confirm action