AbdurRakib wrote:
Because the framers of the United States Constitution (written in 1787) believed that protecting property rights relating to inventions would encourage the new nation’s economic growth, they gave Congress—the national legislature—a constitutional mandate to grant patents for inventions. The resulting patent system has served as a model for those in other nations. Recently, however, scholars have questioned whether the American system helped achieve the framers’ goals. These scholars have contended that from 1794 to roughly 1830, American inventors were unable to enforce property rights because judges were “antipatent” and routinely invalidated patents for arbitrary reasons. This argument is based partly on examination of court decisions in cases where patent holders (“patentees”) brought suit alleging infringement of their patent rights. In the 1820s, for instance, 75 percent of verdicts were decided against the patentee. The proportion of verdicts for the patentee began to increase in the 1830s, suggesting to these scholars that judicial attitudes toward patent rights began shifting then.
Not all patent disputes in the early nineteenth century were litigated, however, and litigated cases were not drawn randomly from the population of disputes. Therefore the rate of verdicts in favor of patentees cannot be used by itself to gauge changes in judicial attitudes or enforceability of patent rights. If early judicial decisions were prejudiced against patentees, one might expect that subsequent courts—allegedly more supportive of patent rights—would reject the former legal precedents. But pre-1830 cases have been cited as frequently as later decisions, and they continue to be cited today, suggesting that the early decisions, many of which clearly declared that patent rights were a just recompense for inventive ingenuity, provided a lasting foundation for patent law. The proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of a change in the underlying population of cases brought to trial. This change was partly due to an 1836 revision to the patent system: an examination procedure, still in use today, was instituted in which each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law. Previously, patents were automatically granted upon payment of a $30 fee.
(Book Question: 533)
The author of the passage cites which of the following as evidence challenging the argument referred to in lines 14–15 [invalidated patents for arbitrary reasons. This argument is based partly on examination of court]?
A. The proportion of cases that were decided against patentees in the 1820s
B. The total number of patent disputes that were litigated from 1794 to 1830
C. The fact that later courts drew upon the legal precedents set in pre-1830 patent cases
D. The fact that the proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s
E. The constitutional rationale for the 1836 revision of the patent system
Passage: US Patent Law
Question: Specific Detail
The Simple StoryThere was a shift in court decisions related to patent disputes in the 1830s. Before this time, most verdicts were decided against the patent holder, but this proportion began to decrease during the 1830s. Some scholars attribute this change to a shift in the attitudes of judges. This view, however, is inconsistent with the fact that later court decisions continue to cite pre-1830 cases; in other words, the judges seem to think those early cases are still valid. A change in the patent examination procedure provides an alternative explanation for the shift in court decisions; after the change, patents were evaluated to make sure they adhered to patent law before the patents were granted.
Sample Passage MapHere is one way to map this passage. (Note: abbreviate as desired!)
1) Shift in patent dec post-1830
Schol: judges’ tude change: more pro-patent
2) But, still cite pre-1830 cases, so maybe not J tude
Diff kinds of cases post-1830
Also: Patent app change
Note: tude is an abbreviation for the word attitude
Step 1: Identify the QuestionThe words
cites … as evidence in the question stem indicate that this is a
Specific Detail question.
Step 2: Find the Support Find the evidence that challenges a specific argument; start by reading and paraphrasing that argument. Note that you will have to look in multiple places to answer this question.
In the first paragraph, the scholars argue that judges’ rulings were unfair and so the patent system may not have helped economic growth before 1830.
Next, what evidence does the author provide countering this claim? This information is found in the second paragraph.
“
If early judicial decisions were prejudiced against patentees, one might expect that subsequent courts—allegedly more supportive of patent rights—would reject the former legal precedent. But pre-1830 cases have been cited as frequently as later decisions, suggesting that the early decisions…provided a lasting foundation for patent law.”
Step 3: Predict an AnswerThe author refutes the scholars argument by pointing out that the pre-1830 cases are still frequently cited. If the post-1830 judges believed that the pre-1830 rulings were unfair or arbitrary, then they would presumably not cite those decisions.
Step 4: Eliminate and Find a Match(A) There is no dispute about the proportion of case decisions against patentees in the 1820s. The disagreement between the author and the scholars relates to the reasons why these decisions were made as they were made.
(B) The actual number of patent disputes in this time period is not mentioned in the passage.
(C) CORRECT. The fact that the cases are still cited counters the ideas that the pre-1830 decisions were arbitrary or biased.
(D) The scholars and the author agree on this point; a greater percentage of court cases were decided in favor of the patentee after 1830.
(E) The author does discuss a change in the patent system, specifically the application procedure, in 1836; the author also suggests that this change may have caused the change in court outcomes as opposed to the reasoning forwarded by the scholars. The constitutional rationale behind this change, however, is never discussed.
_________________
"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!
Advanced Search : https://gmatclub.com/forum/advanced-search/