Logical Reasoning

PT21 · S2 · Q6 Copyright laws protect the rights

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

Copyright laws protect the rights of writers to profits earned from their writings, whereas patent laws protect inventors’ rights to profits earned from their inventions.

Conclusion (Clearly, therefore)

The profit rights of computer-software writers remain unprotected in Jawade.

Evidence

In Jawade, when computer-software writers demanded that their rights to profit be protected, the courts determined that information written for a machine does not fit into either the copyright or the patent category.

Evaluate

The court is saying,

The author is saying,

Can we think of how their profit rights might still be protected?

Hmm, maybe they have a powerful union? Maybe there's some part of the law, that's isn't patent or copyright law, that still offers protection?

Goal

Let's look for a linking idea like,

Or look for an answer that, when negated, could help us argue that their profit rights do still have some protection.

6.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

  1. Computer-software writers are not an

    Out of Scope: future changes

    This conclusion is only a present tense claim about whether software writers currently don't have protection for their profit rights. The author isn't assuming anything about whether or not these software writers might have protection in the future. The negation of this answer says, "the software writers are influential enough that the government will consider changing the law so that (one day) they would have profit rights protected." That wouldn't weaken the author's conclusion that currently the profit rights are not protected.

    3% picked this

  2. Correct

    No laws exist, other than

    Why this is right

    This answer, like (A), has the lovable ruling-out language (not / no) of a Defender answer. When we negate it, it says, "There are laws that exist, beyond copyright / patent laws, that would protect the profit rights of the software writers." That would badly weaken the argument. In fact it would pretty much contradict the conclusion! On Necessary Assumption, if negating an answer turns it into a weakening idea, then it's the correct answer. Another way to think about this answer is conditionally. We could equivalently state this answer by saying "the only laws that protect the profit rights of software writers are copyright laws and patent laws". That would look conditionally like: protects profits ? copyright / patent laws And by contrapositive ~copyright and ~patent ? ~protect profits That's how the argument flowed. The courts established that the software writers don't qualify for copyright and patent law protection. And from that, the author moved to the notion that profit rights aren't protected.

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

    91% picked this

  3. Most of the computer software

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: most Out of Scope: imported The word "most" is wrong on Necessary Assumption 98% of the time we see it. It wouldn't make any difference whether 49% of Jawade's software were imported or whether 51% were imported, so there's no reason the author's argument needs it to be 51%. In fact, the notion of imported vs. domestic software is irrelevant to begin with.

    0% picked this

  4. Computer software is more similar

    Irrelevant Distinction

    All the author's argument cares about is that software writing doesn't qualify for patent law or copyright law. This answer is about which one it's closer to qualifying for. It doesn't matter whether software writing is closer to being covered by copyright law or by patent law. The bottom line of the premise is that software writing doesn't qualify for either one.

    1% picked this

  5. Copyright laws and patent laws

    Irrelevant Distinction

    This answer has the lovable ruling-out "not", so let's negate it and see if it turns into a weakening idea: Copyright and patent laws have been modified since their original adoption. That would have no effect. Regardless of how they've been modified over the years, in their present form, the courts don't think that software writing qualifies for either copyright or patent protection.

    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