Reading Comprehension

PT123 · S1 · P1 · Q1 Course Packs and Copyrights

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

In a recent court case, a copy-shop owner was accused of violating copyright law when, in the preparation of “course packs”—materials photocopied from books and journals and packaged as readings for particular university courses—he copied materials without obtaining permission from or paying sufficient fees to the publishers.

Topic

A court case about whether a copy-shop owner violated copyright law by making and selling educational course packs without publisher permission.

Framework

Answer / Explain

Main Point

The court ruled that the copy-shop’s production of course packs for educational purposes did not violate copyright law, even though the owner profited, because the copying was not an exploitation of the copyrighted content itself. (Most valuable sentence appears at the end of paragraph 2: )

P1: Introducing the Case and Arguments

A copy-shop owner was accused of violating copyright law by selling course packs without permission or proper payment. He argued that getting permission is too hard and expensive, and that course packs let professors assign readings that students couldn’t otherwise afford. The twist: the shop made profits on these packs, which made this case different from the usual classroom "fair use" situations.

P2: Copyright Law, Publishers’ Arguments, and the Court’s Decision

Copyright law considers several factors to judge if copying material is fair—such as whether it’s for commercial or educational use, and how much it affects the market value of the work. The publishers said if copy shops stop paying fees, the value of scholarly works will drop. But the court found no real threat to the market and said it was more important that the copies were for education. The shop owner’s profit didn’t matter since the fee was based on number of pages copied, not the material's content.

P3: Court’s Reasoning and Final Takeaway

The court saw the copy shop’s actions as simply providing a service that makes copying easier and cheaper—not as taking unfair advantage of the authors’ creative work. Professors and students would be allowed to make these copies themselves, so it’s OK for them to use a third party like a copy shop to do it efficiently.

1.

Which one of the following most accurately states the main point of the passage?

  1. Correct

    A court recently ruled that

    Why this is right

    The answer accurately captures the ruling of the court, and since the author never editorialized or contextualized this case, the biggest idea we have in the passage is the court's ruling. This answer matches the language of the final paragraph well.

    Skill tested: Main Point · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    71% picked this

  2. A court recently ruled that

    Opposite

    The court ruled that copy shop owners are not violating copyright law because they're charging solely based on page count, not based on content. In doing so, the court essentially said that course packs are not a potential source of copyright infringement.

    6% picked this

  3. A court recently ruled that

    Not the Recent Ruling

    The beginning of the 2nd paragraph explains the determining factors governing copyrights, according to established copyright law. This copy shop course case didn't establish these factors. This recent case just said, "Taking into consideration the established determining factors, we rule that the copy shop owner did nothing wrong."

    6% picked this

  4. A recent court ruling limits

    Distorted Ruling: right to seek suit

    This feels very close to being right, but the court didn't limit the right to seek suit. That would mean that they are saying, "Publishers, you're not allowed to sue these copy shops". The court isn't preventing them from seeking suit, but it's establishing a precedent that would make them less likely to seek suit. The publishers are still free to seek suit; they will just be thinking, "The judge is probably going to rule against us, like they did in that copy shop case".

    11% picked this

  5. Exceptions to copyright law are

    Too Narrow

    This doesn't reference the central topic (the copy-shop court case), so we know it can't be the main point.

    5% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free