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
MeaningThe 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 senseClause 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 IncorrectC. 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 1999D. 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 MEANINGE. 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