Reading Comprehension

PT123 · S1 · P1 · Q6 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.

6.

Which one of the following, if true, would have most strengthened the publishers' position in this case?

  1. Course packs for courses that

    No Impact

    This seems to state a rather obvious common sense truth, so it's not going to move the needle on this conversation. We would naturally expect that someone who owns a copy shop gets larger profits, the bigger a customer's order is. Courses with larger enrollments have more students, so the order being placed at the copy shop is for more course packs, so the copy shop makes more money. We already knew this answer before we read it, since it's just spelling out a common sense implication of how services and money work.

    5% picked this

  2. The copy-shop owner had actively

    No Impact

    This might seem tempting, if we thought it helped the publishers to say, "This copy shop owner is acting like he's just a passive instrument. They come in, they ask for copies, he doesn't look to see whether it's copyrighted or not. Meanwhile, he's actively knocking on professors' doors to get these things." But the copy-shop owner is expected to seek out business for his shop. If he knows that any entity (such as professors, or bands promoting their shows) need lots of copies, then he will naturally want their business. This doesn't have anything to do with whether having him duplicate copyrighted material is hurting the publishers' bottom line.

    14% picked this

  3. The revenue generated by the

    No Impact

    It wouldn't made any difference here if revenue were flat, increasing, or decreasing. The amount of X that someone is doing doesn't speak to the issue of whether it's okay or not to do X. The fact that copy shop revenue from duplicating course packs is going up doesn't help us assess whether this behavior has any ill effect on publishers.

    4% picked this

  4. Correct

    Many area bookstores had reported

    Why this is right

    Publishers make their money when someone buys an official copy of a work at a bookstore or when someone pays a licensing fee to use some excerpt of a copyrighted work. Publishers brought suit by arguing that if a bunch of copy-shop owners can stop paying permission fees for these course packs (which are just amalgams of snippets from different copyrighted works) then the value of those different copyrighted works would diminish. If a professor can include a 20 page excerpt of a Stephen Pinker book in her class's course pack, then the students don't have buy that Stephen Pinker book from a bookstore, and thus the publisher loses out on money. This answer is strengthening the plausibility of a causal connection between a copyrighted work being included in a course pack and the value of the actual copyrighted work decreasing, by showing a correlation between "included in course pack" and "actual sales of book are suffering".

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

    73% picked this

  5. The publishers had enlisted the

    No Impact

    No one in this court case is questioning whether the copy-shop owner obtained permission. The copy shop owner will freely admit that he didn't. So it doesn't change anything to have further testimony that permission was not obtained.

    4% 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