Q6 - Copyright laws protect

[katherine.morales15]

I narrowed down the answer choices to B and E. I ultimately chose E because the conclusion states that the profit right of computer software writers REMAIN unprotected. Was I wrong to assume that copyright laws and patents laws have remained the same since their original adoption and thus remain unprotected?

I see how B can be right,although I think it is a bit too extreme, but I can't seem to find a reason why E would be wrong.

[timmydoeslsat]

With answer choice E, that is just way unnecessary. We can those patent and copyright laws be modified. For example, maybe the original law of copyright dictated a certain amount of days to challenge a suit and maybe the legislature amended the law in terms of adding or subtracting days.

This one tests a common concept.

We know of two ways to be protected:

Copyright ---> Protected

Patent ---> Protected

We have a situation where the courts stated that the case in situation involved ~copyright and ~patent.

Does this mean we have a conclusion of ~Protected?

It would follow only if those are the only two ways of getting to the idea of Protected.

How do we know whether there is a form of protection for multimedia rights? We do not know that. The argument assumes that no other protection exists but those 2 mentioned of copyright and patent.

[dahee.suh]

I see how B can be right,although I think it is a bit too extreme, but I can't seem to find a reason why E would be wrong.

It's my first time posting!!

Core:
P: In Jawade, information written for computer softwares DOES NOT fit into EITHER copyright or patent law category
C: In Jawade, profit rights of comp software writers remain UNPROTECTED (100%)

Also, this is a NECESSARY ASSUMPTION question, which means that the correct answer would present an assumption that is NEEDED in order for the argument to stand.

(B) may seem extreme at first, but the premise gives ONLY TWO categories for comp software info to be categorized into, then states that because comp software info doesn't get protected by EITHER CATEGORY, concludes that there is NO CATEGORY for comp software info to be protected under. For this argument to stand, it is NECESSARY to assume that there are no OTHER categories OTHER THAN the two mentioned in the premise. If there are other categories, then computer software writers WOULD BE protected in Jawade, and the argument would fall apart.

(E) is out of scope. Whether the copyright & patent law was modified or not since the orginal adoption has nothing to do with the core argument. Try negating it & see if the argument falls apart. Even if Copyright laws and patent laws in Jawade HAVE been modified since their original adoption, it could STILL BE the case that computer software writers REMAIN unprotected. (There could still be no categories for software programs to fit under). The lawcould be modified even multiple times and still continue to not protect software info. Even with negation, the argument could still stand, which means the assumption wasn't NEEDED in the first place. It is NOT NEEDED for the law to be NOT MODIFIED at all.

Even without negation, the PREMISE already states that software info DOES NOT FIT (notice the PRESENT TENSE), THEREFORE the law DOESN'T protect computer software writers. To assume anything about past modifications (or the fact that the law has never changed) of the copyright/patent law is NOT relevant to the argument, let alone necessary.

Hope my analysis makes sense. If anyone has a comment/critique, please feel free to comment!

[frankpholmes20]

I narrowed down the answer choices to B and E. I ultimately chose E because the conclusion states that the profit right of computer software writers REMAIN unprotected. Was I wrong to assume that copyright laws and patents laws have remained the same since their original adoption and thus remain unprotected?

I see how B can be right,although I think it is a bit too extreme, but I can't seem to find a reason why E would be wrong.

Some people confuse patents, copyrights, and trademarks. Although there may be some similarities among these kinds of intellectual property protection, they are different and serve different purposes. Copyright is a form of protection provided to the authors of "original works of authorship" including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works, both published and unpublished. You may browse at this site for more detail info regarding patent and laws.

[LolaC289]

For anyone who may be wondering why (A) doesn't work in here: the conclusion talks about remain unprotected, it's about status quo. While (A) talks about changing the law which is about the future, which has no impact on the conclusion that we care about.