Reading Comprehension

PT130 · S2 · P3 · Q14 Tangible-object Theory

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

Start practicing free

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.

Main Point But while this account seems plausible for copyrightable entities that do, in fact, have enduring tangible forms, it cannot accommodate the standard assumption that such evanescent things as live broadcasts or sporting events can be copyrighted (Third Paragraph).

Passage Map P1 - Describe the tangible object theory. P2 - Outline the perceived support for the tangible object theory. P3 - Point out the inadequacies of the tangible object theory.

14.

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

  1. Copyright and other intellectual-property rights

    Opposing Point

    This is the assertion of proponents of the tangible-object theory (first paragraph).

    7% picked this

  2. Correct

    Attempts to explain copyright and

    Why this is right

    This is supported in the second and third paragraphs.

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

    82% picked this

  3. Copyrighting a work amounts to

    Too Narrow / Opposing Point

    While this is true (second paragraph), this is only part of the larger argument put forward by tangible-object theorists.

    2% picked this

  4. Explanations of copyright and other

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope The passage does not discuss the argument that ideas should be allowed to circulate freely.

    6% picked this

  5. Under the tangible-object theory of

    Trap

    Opposing Point / Unsupported The purpose of this passage is to undermine the tangible-object theory. Furthermore, rights of ownership of ideas are not straightforwardly applied but rather argued to exist by logical extension of the right to own concrete, tangible objects.

    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.

Save and practice this skill
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