Logical Reasoning

PT157 · S3 · Q9 Most lawyers hold that violations

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning 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

Most lawyers hold that violations of the rights of those who possess sites on the web are best prevented using copyright law.

Evidence

Many of the words used to describe web sites evoke ideas that are usually associated with real estate.

The common law of trespass usually applies to cases of encroachment on real estate.

Conclusion

It is reasonable to extend that law [trespass] to protect against encroachments on property in cyberspace.

Evaluate

The evidence notes a similarity between web sites and real estate. Many of the same words, like "site" and "visiting" are used when discussing both web sites and real estate. But then the argument gets cheeky. It uses this one similarity, which is pretty superficial, as a basis for claiming that web sites and real estate are similar in another way: the same types of laws should apply to both.

When two types of activities happen to use similar terminology, does that necessarily mean that the same types of laws should apply to both? If I drive a car and also use Google Drive on my computer, do I have to obey local traffic laws while sitting at my desk using my laptop? If so, I guess I should put on a seatbelt and get rid of this glass of wine...

9.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

  1. fails to provide adequate evidence

    Out of Scope

    The argument does not claim cyberspace property is "widely considered to be real estate." It draws an analogy based on shared terminology. This answer addresses a stronger claim than the argument makes.

    12% picked this

  2. has a premise that presupposes

    Circular Reasoning

    No premise presupposes the conclusion. The premises about shared terminology and trespass law's real estate application are factual claims independent of whether trespass law should apply to cyberspace. The flaw is a weak analogy, not circular logic.

    2% picked this

  3. itself provides significant evidence against

    Self-Contradiction

    The evidence does not contradict the conclusion — it is just weak. Shared terminology provides some minimal support for the legal analogy, not evidence against it. The problem is insufficiency, not self-contradiction.

    2% picked this

  4. Correct

    fails to provide evidence that

    Why this is right

    This precisely identifies the flaw. The argument's analogy between web sites and real estate rests entirely on shared vocabulary. No evidence is provided that web sites and real estate share substantive characteristics relevant to legal treatment — such as exclusive possession, physical boundaries, or interference with use. The answer correctly states that the argument fails to show the similarities go beyond verbal coincidence.

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

    83% picked this

  5. defends a view solely on

    Ad Hominem

    The argument challenges the lawyers' view (copyright law) in favor of trespass law. It does not defer to expert opinion — it contradicts it. This answer reverses the argument's relationship to authority.

    1% 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