Principle: Any person or business

Answer choices

1. A

   Unrelated to Goal5% picked this

   The operator of a business has the same legal obligations to customers who use self-service facilities as it has to

   We need our answer to establish that GDS "knowingly aided someone's infringement". This answer doesn't have any language like "knowingly aided".

   5%
2. B

   Unrelated to Goal1% picked this

   The management of a business that is open to the public is obligated to report to the authorities any illegal activity that

   We need our answer to establish that GDS "knowingly aided someone's infringement". This answer doesn't have any language like "knowingly aided".

   1%
3. C

   Unrelated to Goal3% picked this

   The owner of a self-service printing kiosk should post a notice advising customers that copyrighted material should not be printed at the kiosk without

   We need our answer to establish that GDS "knowingly aided someone's infringement". This answer doesn't have any language like "knowingly aided".

   3%
4. D

   Unrelated to Goal5% picked this

   Owners of self-service facilities should monitor those facilities in order to ensure that they are not used for

   We need our answer to establish that GDS "knowingly aided someone's infringement". This answer doesn't have any language like "knowingly aided".

   5%
5. E

   Correct86% picked this

   A person or business providing a service that can be expected to be used to infringe on a copyright should be considered to knowingly

   Why this is right

   Well this was easier than one might expect. This is the only answer that has the missing trigger language from the principle. It's not a perfect answer, but it's the best available when none of the other ones did anything related to our task. This rule says: if person/business provides then they should a service that can be ? be considered to expected to be used to knowingly aid any infringe on a copyright infringer using it Can we say, when it comes to a "self-service photo-printing kiosk", that a person or business can expect that service to be used to infringe on a copyright? I mean ... the information we were given didn't establish that. But, yes, it's a fairly reasonable thing in the real-world to think, "If I give people the ability to make photo-quality prints, are some people going to use it to infringe on copyrights? Probably." If this rule applies to GDS's self-serve photo kiosk, then it establishes that they knowingly aided the customer who infringed on a copyright, which means we can apply the Principle and derive that they are also guilty of copyright infringement. It's pretty shocking that LSAC would ask us to pick an answer like this, where the trigger is only applicable if we make a somewhat tenuous real-world judgment on the matter. But since the other four are structurally useless to us, it's hard to resist the idea that this is the best available answer.

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

   86%