Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 31 Oct 2014, 10:03

Today

Waiting for Decisions? Join us in the chat | All GMAT Club Tests are Free and Open


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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Posts: 474
Location: India
GPA: 2.5
WE: Operations (Hospitality and Tourism)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 114 [0], given: 59

The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who [#permalink] New post 27 Mar 2013, 23:41
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

92% (02:41) correct 8% (00:00) wrong based on 68 sessions
The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

A. .....
B. The passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with sole intent that they will sell
C. The passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
E. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling

OA to be revealed later

Will appreciate discussion of each answer choice :cool
_________________

"When the going gets tough, the tough gets going!"

Bring ON SOME KUDOS MATES+++



-----------------------------
Quant Notes consolidated: consolodited-quant-guides-of-forum-most-helpful-in-preps-151067.html#p1217652

My GMAT journey begins: my-gmat-journey-begins-122251.html

All about Richard Ivey: all-about-richard-ivey-148594.html#p1190518

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 340
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 159 [0], given: 136

Re: The proliferation .... [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2013, 04:36
sdas wrote:
The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

A. .passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
B. The passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with sole intent that they will sell
C. The passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
E. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling

OA to be revealed later

Will appreciate discussion of each answer choice :cool

Meaning
The Sentence talks about the Law i.e anti cyber law. i.e Anti cyber allows companies to file damages..


Lets analyze the sentence

The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

Blue Italics is Noun Modifier -Modifying Cybersquatters i.e giving additional information about Cyber squatters. You can easily cross it off.
Hence, sentence becomes


The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

Lets breakdown into CLauses and see if Subject Verb makes sense

Clause 1 - The proliferation -led
Clause 2- who register

Pronoun Error Validation -
Note - Usually, for demonstrative Pronoun "THOSE", we need Noun following it, such as-
Many people consider these products unique.

Here, the usage of THOSE is correct, because the word "People" is used in Ellipsis construction

Them -> Them refers to domains (both are plural, hence correct)

Modifier-
, allowing companies ....later.
Since, the sentence does have cause effect relationship, hence COMMA +ING works perfectly over here.

Modifier 2 -
with the sole intent of selling them later - it is prepositional modifier used as adverbial modifier, modifying "who register"

As of now, Choice A looks good.

Lets Analyze other options -


B. The passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with sole intent that they will sell - Making it RESTRICTIVE CLAUSE, per original meaning cause effect is missing. What is they referring to ? COMPANIES.. hence Incorrect
C. The passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling- Same as that of B, with the sole intent of selling ...selling WHAT--TWO TIMES 1999
D. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell --> IT -> proliferation allows?? It is not proliferation that allows , it is the law that allows the companies... Hence Changes MEANING
E. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling -- The proliferation led to Anti Consumer ACT, I doubt...Moreover, passed and allowing CHANGES MEANING, giving equal emphasis on two actions, "passed" and "allowing" -> Not correct.

HENCE (A)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Found helpful, please provide KUDOS so that I can unlock my GMAT CLUB tests
_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 138
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 22

Re: The proliferation .... [#permalink] New post 16 Apr 2013, 12:57
Quote:
Mate your explanation is very good an comprehensive…..your knowledge is really good too however your answer is wrong. OA is C my friend :)


Mate your answer is correct but option C is incorrectly copied. You repeated the year 1999 twice in option C. So it was out of the race.
Copying correct question for you.

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.
A passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.
B the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
C the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seed up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
E the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
_________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 61
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 19

Re: The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who [#permalink] New post 16 Apr 2013, 14:09
For me its C.

I think the two "in 1999" its just a typo.
_________________

MV
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing.” ― George S. Patton Jr

Expert Post
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 11 Dec 2012
Posts: 313
Followers: 59

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 66

Re: The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2013, 07:18
Expert's post
targetbschool wrote:
whats wrong with A


Hi targetbschool, the very first word of the underlined portion is the problem. Ignoring the unnecessary modifiers, we have: The proliferation(...) led to passing the Act. Who's doing the passing? Much better as a noun "The proliferation led to the passage..." If such a choice is available.

Thanks!
-Ron
_________________

Ron Awad
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
Save $100 on Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting Services
Veritas Prep Reviews

Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1125
Location: United States
Followers: 140

Kudos [?]: 1400 [0], given: 122

Re: The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2013, 14:16
sdas wrote:
The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

A. .....
B. The passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with sole intent that they will sell
C. The passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
D. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
E. The Anit- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $ 100000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling

OA to be revealed later

Will appreciate discussion of each answer choice :cool


@sdas
Please revise the answer C. the two "in 1999" is a mistake.
Here the link of the question from Manhattan GMAT
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the ... -t392.html
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMV Chief of Design.

Re: The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who   [#permalink] 17 Apr 2013, 14:16
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who lionheart187 10 31 Aug 2008, 11:41
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who MamtaKrishnia 4 19 Jul 2008, 18:22
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who tarek99 10 10 Jul 2008, 08:37
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who lexis 0 22 May 2008, 00:15
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who tarek99 3 12 Dec 2007, 04:35
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The proliferation of so-called Cybersquatters, people who

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.