Reading Comprehension

PT130 · S2 · P3 · Q17 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

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.

17.

Suppose an inventor describes an innovative idea for an invention to an engineer, who volunteers to draft specifications for a prototype and then produces the prototype using the engineer's own materials. Which one of the following statements would apply to this case under the tangible-object theory of intellectual property, as the author describes that theory?

  1. Correct

    Only the engineer is entitled

    Why this is right

    This is supported in the second paragraph.

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

    84% picked this

  2. Only the inventor is entitled

    Contradiction

    The engineer is entitled to claim the invention as intellectual property (second paragraph).

    6% picked this

  3. The inventor and the engineer

    Contradiction

    The engineer is entitled to claim the invention as intellectual property (second paragraph).

    2% picked this

  4. The engineer is entitled to

    Unsupported Relationship

    The extra requirement that the inventor retains the rights to all profits generated by the invention is not supported in the passage.

    5% picked this

  5. The inventor is entitled to

    Contradiction

    The engineer is entitled to claim the invention as intellectual property (second paragraph).

    3% 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