Reading Comprehension

PT144 · S1 · P2 · Q11 Biotechnology Patents

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

The following passage was adapted from a law journal article published in 1998.

Topic

Biotech Patents' effect on basic research

Framework

Challenge a Position

Main Point

Although many are concerned about the chilling effect of biotech patents on basic research, it's really not that different from how it's always been, and people who want to do basic research on patented materials will still usually be able to access those materials without fear of being prosecuted for patent infringement.

Summary

P1 - Background to the (perceived) Problem

The author sets up the background tension. Industries want to patent their biotech innovations in order to monetize them and academic researchers want to be able to patent their findings since that's how they get research funding. Then we get our Purpose Pivot (but, yet, however, recently) showing us that recently it's feeling like the patenting of biotech could be problematic.

At this point, I would have been using a Problem / Solution framework, since it feels like this last sentence is setting up that type of passage.

P2 - The Position the author will challenge

This lays out the concerns of "the perceived threat to basic research". Throughout this paragraph, the author is reminding us that this is not her view, inclining us to expect that her view will be at odds with this one. Here are how four of the sentences begin:

- the perceived threat - these restrictions are seen as - some researchers fear - academic researchers who oppose biotech patents fear

P3 - The author challenges this Position

The author tries to calm down the worried people from P2. She begins with a concession "While it is true that", but then pivots into undermining their concerns. - basic researchers will still have access, without a costly agreement - patent holders won't come after them, and even if they did, judges usually don't enforce patents against harmless (non-commercial) research

11.

The author refers to the early days of biotechnology (first sentence of the final paragraph) primarily in order to

  1. furnish a brief account of

    Trap

    Dictionary Trap Out of Scope: brief account When we're asked for the meaning or function of something in context, there's usually a trap answer that tries to bait people in with the dictionary connotations of a word. "early days" = "history / evolution" But the author does not furnish a brief account of the evolution of biotech. The author makes a momentary comparison to the past to say, "There's really not that much more protective secrecy nowadays than there was in the early days of biotech."

    1% picked this

  2. Correct

    establish that present competitive practices

    Why this is right

    The author's first sentence is saying, "Yes, we've shifted away from communal sharing and more towards a market model, but, there's really not that much more protective secrecy nowadays than there was in the early days of biotech." Even then, people would take measures to prevent access to stuff they had created. That's all patents are doing. Same same, but different. This ain't nothin' new = this is not entirely unprecedented (i.e. "there's at least some precedent for this")

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

    93% picked this

  3. express nostalgia for a time

    Dictionary Trap Opposite: untainted

    When we're asked for the meaning or function of something in context, there's usually a trap answer that tries to bait people in with the dictionary connotations of a word. "early days" = "nostalgia" But the author does not say in the past biotech was untainted by commercial motives. Although she acknowledges that there are more commercial motives nowadays, she brings up the early days to remind the worried people that there have always been commercial motives and thus always been researchers trying to hide/conceal their findings from competitors.

    1% picked this

  4. argue that biotechnology research is

    Out of Scope: more sophisticated

    What's being said in this sentence doesn't make any reference to the complexity or sophistication of the discoveries, so there's no way to say that the author is bringing up the early days in order to compare past to present based on sophistication.

    0% picked this

  5. provide a historical justification for

    Opposite

    The author is not trying to justify an opposition to biotech patents. She's actually trying to weaken the opposition to biotech patents. She's telling the opponents from Paragraph 2, "Chillax, y'all. Biotech researchers have been hiding their discoveries since the early days of biotech. This isn't some new problem that patents are creating."

    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