Last visit was: 19 May 2024, 06:23 It is currently 19 May 2024, 06:23
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
Unanswered
Active Topics
New posts
New comers' posts
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
neelesh
Manager
Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 129
Own Kudos [?]: 528 [29]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   09 Apr 2008, 20:05
3
Kudos
26
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

85% (01:20) correct 15% (01:24) wrong based on 1193 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
E
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
IlanaEconomistGMAT
Economist GMAT Tutor Instructor
Joined: 21 Aug 2013
Posts: 12
Own Kudos [?]: 104 [11]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   14 Nov 2013, 04:51
10
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
A few comments: 'Being' isn't a safe criterion for just eliminating off the bat, as sometimes correct answer choices do use 'being'.

Here is my take on the question:

A and D should be eliminated, because "unlikely in" is non-idiomatic. The correct preposition to use with 'likely' or 'unlikely' is 'to'. Answer choices B, C, and E use 'unlikely to', so let's take a look at them.

Answer choice C is a run-on sentence. There is no preposition or connector connecting the fragment "federal prosecutors...infringers' to the previous part of the sentence. Thus the sentence as a whole is syntactically deficient. To makes sense, the sentence needs either a preposition, such as "with" (B) or punctuation or a conjunction, as in D and E
(semicolon and 'therefore').

This leaves us with answer choices B and E to choose from.

Answer choice B incorrectly uses the defining relative pronoun 'who' to describe 'federal prosecutors'. This is illogical. The point of the sentence isn't to define or characterize federal prosecutors as folks who always will not pursue copyright offenders. Furthermore, the phrase 'with federal prosecutors, etc.' poorly modifies what comes previously. We can't say of a 'misdemeanor charge' that it is 'with federal prosecutors, etc.' This answer choice falls on what the OG calls 'logical predication'. The use of 'being' also adds to the poor construction of this sentence.

This leaves us with E, which inserts punctuation and a conjunction to clarify the logical relations between clauses, and clean up the muddled string of modifiers.




neelesh wrote:
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were
General Discussion
User avatar
carlson2010
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 65
Own Kudos [?]: 24 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   10 Apr 2008, 02:46
I say E

A. Wrong because of "being unlikely"
B. Wrong because of "with federal prosecutors"...with what?
C. Wrong because the first part of the sentence says, "first-time charge of copyright infringement WAS merely a misdemeanor," so when mentioning federal prosecutors one should use the past tense. This sentence doesn't.
D. Wrong because of "offenders being subject"
User avatar
terp26
Current Student
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1212
Own Kudos [?]: 351 [0]
Given Kudos: 12
Schools:Chicago Booth '11
 Q50  V38
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   10 Apr 2008, 08:06
C is wrong, the middle part of the sentence totally upsets the flow of the sentence. It looks as if it was just placed right in the middle of the sentence with no bearing on the meaning.
avatar
sudkumar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [3]
Given Kudos: 4
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   13 Jun 2013, 07:35
2
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers is a run on sentence hence wrong

B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
With federal prosecuter -wrong modifier
Being always wordy

C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
same as B wrong modifier

D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
prosecutors were....... and "offenders being" not parallel

E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were
cause and effect relationship by using Therefore
correct parallelism between prosecutors were.....and offenders were hence correct answer
_________________
User avatar
danzig
Manager
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 103
Own Kudos [?]: 329 [2]
Given Kudos: 16
Schools: HBS '16 Stanford '16
Send PM
Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   20 Sep 2013, 08:47
2
Kudos
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were

These are my doubts:
In B, does "with" change the meaning of the sentence?, is it ilogical?
In E, what kind of relationship between two clauses does a semicolon stablish? For example, when we use "AND" to connect two clauses, the AND implies that there is no relationship between those clauses. Both are independent. But when we use "OR", the relationship between the clauses is different. In that sense, does the semicolon stablish a relationship between the two clauses that it connects?
Also in E, does "therefore" affect the two clauses after it? I say this because, as I mentioned before, the two clauses connected by AND are independents from each other. Thanks!
User avatar
pqhai
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 869
Own Kudos [?]: 8575 [1]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: United States
Send PM
Re: Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   20 Sep 2013, 10:06
1
Kudos
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
Wrong. Parallelism problem.

B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
Wrong. Because a comma separates two clauses, "with" does not attach to the preceding clause thus it does not change meaning. Yet "with" does not make sense either.
Parallelism problem: see red part.

C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
Wrong. Parallelism problem.

D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
Wrong. Parallelism problem.

E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were
Correct. The semicolon separates two clauses. The clause before a semicolon is the main clause, the clause after a semicolon is dependent clause.
In addition, "and" is also used to connect two independent clauses, which provide more information for the main clause (the one before a semicolon). Because two results (fed prosecutors were...... & offenders were......) are different and happen simultaneously, thus "and" is correct.

Hope it helps.
avatar
lukep
Intern
Intern
Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 13
Own Kudos [?]: 142 [3]
Given Kudos: 18
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Foster '17
GMAT Date: 01-14-2015
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   21 Sep 2013, 06:24
3
Kudos
danzig wrote:
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were

These are my doubts:
In B, does "with" change the meaning of the sentence?, is it ilogical?
In E, what kind of relationship between two clauses does a semicolon stablish? For example, when we use "AND" to connect two clauses, the AND implies that there is no relationship between those clauses. Both are independent. But when we use "OR", the relationship between the clauses is different. In that sense, does the semicolon stablish a relationship between the two clauses that it connects?
Also in E, does "therefore" affect the two clauses after it? I say this because, as I mentioned before, the two clauses connected by AND are independents from each other. Thanks!
To answer your questions:
The "with" does change the meaning of the sentence insofar as it makes it not make sense. The reason we might miss this is because the with- clause has a who- clause embedded in it, distracting you from the fact that the with clause is missing something important.
Here's what that means.
(1) The iPhone 5c is extremely popular, with shoppers lining up overnight to buy it.
(2) The iPhone 5c is extremely popular, with shoppers who queued overnight leaving stores tired but satisfied.

If you look at (2), it would be grammatical, if a bit nonsensical, if we left out the who-clause (The iPhone 5c is popular, with shoppers leaving stores tired but satisfied.) The problem with B is that we don't have a verb to go with the noun federal prosecutors. Take a look at what happens when you take out the who- clause

Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, with federal prosecutors, offenders being subject to relatively small penalties.

You need a verb to go with the noun federal prosecutors. This could be fixed as:

Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, with federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being subject to relatively small penalties.


As to your second question, "therefore" is a really common word to come after a semi-colon. It doesn't change the meaning, but it does help to emphasize the causal link between the two clauses.

Hope that helps!
User avatar
TGC
Director
Director
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 587
Own Kudos [?]: 3172 [0]
Given Kudos: 322
Concentration: General Management, General Management
Schools: ISB '16 NUS '17 NTU '17 XLRI SMU '17 IIM Lucknow IPMX'16 (A)
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE:Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   26 Jun 2014, 07:16
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were

Construction IC,Modifier,DC which is wrong so A/B/C are out.

'To pursue' is better than 'in pursuing'

Hence (E)
avatar
supi12
Intern
Intern
Joined: 06 May 2014
Posts: 15
Own Kudos [?]: [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   07 Sep 2014, 12:02
Option C is not a run-on since it is not a sentence. To be a sentence, we need a verb, whereas "federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers" does not contain a verb.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
User avatar
L
daagh
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Status: enjoying
Posts: 5265
Own Kudos [?]: 42113 [4]
Given Kudos: 422
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   27 Nov 2016, 10:50
3
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
Top Contributor
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.


Is this question from Veritas or GMAT Prep? The tag seems to suggest it is from Veritas.
that aside--

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were -----
1.when there are two modifiers that modify a previous clause, you need to conjugate them properly with a coordinator such as ''and'. 2. 'being unlikely' is unidiomatic; after all, the whole issue is one of the past and as of now this practice is not extant. 3. When you have two modifiers you cannot have one as a phrase and the other as a clause. In this case , the "while offenders' clause is a dependent clause with a verb 'were'. 4. The use of 'while' is dubious. It is sometimes used to denote a contrast and here there is no contrast involved.


B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being --- suffers from the first two faults


C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were -- fault 1 and 3 and 4.


D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being -- In the second clause, the first part is a clause while the second part is a phrase. -//ism error.

E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were -- Correct choice. surmounts all the pitfalls of the previous charges.

One small note about the use of the semi-colon. What comes after a semi-colon, must be an independent clause. But it should be also a related clause with some relevance to the previous clause. E is an independent clause and related the whole issue. Independence does not mean unrelatedness.

Example. I went to New York to see Tommy; somebody was busy planning about building a wall around the US. This sentence is absurd as my going to New York has no relation to somebody being busy with building walls. Therefore, using a semicolon is wrong.
However, the following will be correct. --- I went to New York to see Tommy; I couldn't meet him as he had suddenly left for seeing his bed-ridden father. - You can see the relatedness between the first clause before and the second clause after the semicolon.
User avatar
L
CrackverbalGMAT
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4944
Own Kudos [?]: 7671 [0]
Given Kudos: 216
Location: India
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   17 Nov 2020, 23:02
Top Contributor
neelesh wrote:
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were


This question is based on Idiomatic Usage and Construction.

The adjective ‘unlikely’ is followed by an infinitive and not a participle. The conjunction ‘while’ implies a contrast that is not intended by the sentence. So, Option A can be eliminated.

Option D also contains the idiomatically inappropriate usage – unlikely in pursuing. So, Option D can also be eliminated.

Option C is a run-on sentence. The phrase “federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers” should have had a verb and a conjunction to separate it from the first part of the sentence. So, Option C can be eliminated.

In Option B, the two phrases “with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers and offenders being subject to relatively small penalties” are placed one after the other with no clear connection to the first part of the sentence. The sentence seems to convey the meaning that federal prosecutors were part of the misdemeanor charge. The last participle phrase has no logical subject. Since the sentence is illogical, Option B can be ruled out.

Option E has a semi-colon separating the two parts of the sentence. The transition word ‘therefore’ logically connects the two parts of the sentence by indicating that the reason federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers and offenders were subject to relatively small penalties is that a first time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge until the passage of the Act. Therefore, E is the most appropriate option.

Jayanthi Kumar
User avatar
D
thangvietnam
Director
Director
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 778
Own Kudos [?]: 396 [0]
Given Kudos: 2198
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   19 Nov 2020, 21:57
neelesh wrote:
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were


first, talk about a pattern "main clause+comma+with+noun+doing/do-ed/adjective.

in this pattern, some times, "with" can be omitted.

"comma+with..." can modify the main clause, showing context, reason and effect of the main clause.
I learn gmat tonight, with many person going out.
we also have a pattern "with+noun" , which modify the main clause, showing the instrument of the main action.
I write with a pen.

now, look at choice A , B and C and see whether they are fit to the patterns above. (remember, we can omit "'with" in the first pattern )

choice A.
comma+noun+doing is fit to the first pattern. so, 'federal... infringers" is good. but 'while offender..." is not good. this clause need to modifiy a full independent clause. so, it must modify the main clause, "the charge were... this modification is not logical. in summary, the choice A is grammatical but not logical.
choice B
'with +prosecutors" fit the second pattern, in which "with+noun" shows instrument. but there is no instrument here. there is only persons. this choice is grammatical but illogical.
choice C
"prosecutors unlikely" is fit to the first pattern. this phrase is grammatical but "offender were..." , like choice A, is wrong.
avatar
B
Jaya6
Manager
Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2021
Posts: 71
Own Kudos [?]: 12 [0]
Given Kudos: 142
Location: India
Schools: ISB '23 (S)
GPA: 3.2
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   19 Jul 2021, 20:46
IlanaEconomistGMAT wrote:
A few comments: 'Being' isn't a safe criterion for just eliminating off the bat, as sometimes correct answer choices do use 'being'.

Here is my take on the question:

A and D should be eliminated, because "unlikely in" is non-idiomatic. The correct preposition to use with 'likely' or 'unlikely' is 'to'. Answer choices B, C, and E use 'unlikely to', so let's take a look at them.

Answer choice C is a run-on sentence. There is no preposition or connector connecting the fragment "federal prosecutors...infringers' to the previous part of the sentence. Thus the sentence as a whole is syntactically deficient. To makes sense, the sentence needs either a preposition, such as "with" (B) or punctuation or a conjunction, as in D and E
(semicolon and 'therefore').

This leaves us with answer choices B and E to choose from.


Answer choice B incorrectly uses the defining relative pronoun 'who' to describe 'federal prosecutors'. This is illogical. The point of the sentence isn't to define or characterize federal prosecutors as folks who always will not pursue copyright offenders. Furthermore, the phrase 'with federal prosecutors, etc.' poorly modifies what comes previously. We can't say of a 'misdemeanor charge' that it is 'with federal prosecutors, etc.' This answer choice falls on what the OG calls 'logical predication'. The use of 'being' also adds to the poor construction of this sentence.

This leaves us with E, which inserts punctuation and a conjunction to clarify the logical relations between clauses, and clean up the muddled string of modifiers.




neelesh wrote:
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were



Hi, could you please highlight the words that make the two sentences independent of each other? As in please highlight the sub, verb and object of the two given sentences.
User avatar
S
harish555
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 155
Own Kudos [?]: 37 [0]
Given Kudos: 386
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '24 (A$$)
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V30
GPA: 3.03
WE:Marketing (Retail Banking)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   01 Apr 2022, 10:53
Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act in 1982, a first-time charge of copyright infringement was merely a misdemeanor charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were subject to relatively small penalties.

A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
Prosecutors being unlikely – Absolutely absurd formation. A is out

B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
Offenders being – Wrong. With prosecutors, offenders – Illogical meaning

C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
Intended meaning is wrong. If offenders were subject to relatively small penalties, then federal prosecutors were pursuing criminal copyright infringers . That s not the intended meaning.

D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
Unlikely in – wrong idiom, federal prosecutors were(verb) and offenders being(gerund), Verb is missing. Wrong parallelism

E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were
federal prosecutors were and offenders were ..
User avatar
P
debjit1990
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2017
Posts: 297
Own Kudos [?]: 269 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: India
GMAT 1: 580 Q42 V27
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   21 Jun 2022, 00:12
Ans:E
A. charge, federal prosecutors being unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
B. charge, with federal prosecutors who were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, offenders being
C. charge, federal prosecutors unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, while offenders were
D. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely in pursuing criminal copyright infringers and offenders being
E. charge; therefore, federal prosecutors were unlikely to pursue criminal copyright infringers, and offenders were
User avatar
VerbalBot
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17322
Own Kudos [?]: 851 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink] Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting   09 Sep 2023, 00:26
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Until the passage of the Piracy and Counterfeiting [#permalink]
09 Sep 2023, 00:26
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6929 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts