PT130.S2.P3.Q20 > 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

20.

It can be inferred that ███ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ███████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████

Question Type

Author’s perspective

Implied

This is an Inference question from the author’s perspective. Remember that the author’s main point is the criticism of the tangible-object theory of copyright. Most of the author’s perspective is found in P3.

Theorists who suggest ████ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ██████████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ █████████ ██ █████████

Unsupported. From what we see in the passage, the author doesn’t have an issue with applying the notion of retained rights to intellectual property.

If a work ████ ███ █████ ██ █ █████████ ████████ █████ █████ ██ ██ █████ ███████████ █████ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ██████ ████ █████████ ███████████

Anti-supported. This is the view of the proponents of the tangible-object theory. Actually, one of the problems that the author sees with the tangible-object theory is that it doesn’t account for the fact that non-tangible things can be owned.

Under existing statutes, ████████ ██ ████████ ████████ █████ ████ ████ ████████████ ██ ████████ ████████████ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ █████ █████ ██ ███ ███ ████████ █████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████

Unsupported. The passage doesn’t discuss existing law, so we don’t know what the author thinks about this.

13%

An adequate theoretical █████████████ ██ █████████ █████ ██████ ██████████ ████ █ ██████ ███████ ██████████ ████ ███ █████ ████████ ██ ████ █████

One of the problems that the author has with the tangible-object theory is that it doesn’t recognize that creating an idea might be more important than putting the idea into a tangible form. This is also shown in the example with the poet and the friend. The fact that the author takes issue with this aspect of the tangible-object theory shows that the author thinks that a good theoretical justification of copyright should give original ownership of the ideas to the creator––something that the tangible object theory doesn’t necessarily do.

64%

It is common, ███ ██████████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ███ ██ ████████████

Anti-supported. The author does think that things like live broadcasts can be copyrighted––one of the failures of the tangible-object theory, according to the author, is that it doesn’t account for ownership of these non-tangible things.

13%

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 130 - Section 2 - Passage 3 - Question 20

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action

PrepTest 130 - Section 2 - Passage 3 - Question 20

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Want to know why the right answer is right?