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

 It is currently 29 Aug 2016, 08:38

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 914
Followers: 65

Kudos [?]: 489 [8] , given: 17

When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Mar 2009, 03:55
8
KUDOS
29
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

47% (02:06) correct 53% (01:22) wrong based on 1986 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
(C) Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
(D) The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
B
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Manager
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
Posts: 62
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Mar 2009, 07:59
A
Intern
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 12
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Mar 2009, 10:16
Answer should be A, since otherwise the author could not come to the conclusion stated in the first sentence: if companies could find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology the consumer would not invariably lose. The extreme phrasing ("invariably") is also a good hint that the first sentence is the one to have a closer look at.

About B: if it was the companies obligation they not only should allow other manufacturers to license patented technology, but they would have to. That is my interpretation of obligation.
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 864 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2009, 00:30
D is the best

I think the argument preproposes that the consumer did NOT always loose if the company allow other companies to produce patented tech.
_________________
VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1287
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 358 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2009, 01:00
My choice is A
nitya34 wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

A. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
B. Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
C. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
D. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.

is it B?
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 111
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 184 [17] , given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2009, 03:52
17
KUDOS
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

Explanation:

Conclusion: Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

How did we arrive at this conclusion? What if the companies don’t allow licensing of patented technology? If they don’t, consumers will suffer. But why should the companies really consider consumers?
-----------------------
A. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
---> Does not address the issue raised above.

B. because Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer. ---> This option answers the last question, thus, pointing to the presupposition involved.

C. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them. ---> Not necessarily true for arriving at the argument.

D. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
---> Irrelevant. Does not address the issue raised above.

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

I think it should be option B.

Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 261
Location: Kolkata
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 9

### Show Tags

13 Mar 2009, 07:52
IMO that in either case the assumption is that the other companies cannot find similar technologies else the business model (and our argument in question) would fail. A is therfore necessary assumption
_________________

Thanks
rampuria

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 282
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 87 [2] , given: 2

### Show Tags

13 Mar 2009, 23:30
2
KUDOS
Technext wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

Explanation:

Conclusion: Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

How did we arrive at this conclusion? What if the companies don’t allow licensing of patented technology? If they don’t, consumers will suffer. But why should the companies really consider consumers?
-----------------------
A. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
---> Does not address the issue raised above.

B. because Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer. ---> This option answers the last question, thus, pointing to the presupposition involved.

C. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them. ---> Not necessarily true for arriving at the argument.

D. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
---> Irrelevant. Does not address the issue raised above.

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

I think it should be option B.

Regards,
Technext

I agree with the above analysis. In addition with assumption questions you must always focus on the conclusion (Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology)....doing so clearly eliminates A.
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 111
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2009, 09:46
Can we have the OA & OE please?

Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 914
Followers: 65

Kudos [?]: 489 [0], given: 17

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2009, 23:24
will post tonight
_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 864 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2009, 01:19
Second look, E

OA cannot be A, B, C. D is a trap. will explain if correct!
_________________
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 914
Followers: 65

Kudos [?]: 489 [2] , given: 17

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2009, 08:39
2
KUDOS
The conclusion of the argument is that companies should allow other manufacturers to license
patented technology. The basis for that claim is that not doing so keeps prices high and harms the
consumer. We're asked what the argument assumes ("presupposes") in drawing its conclusion.

The correct answer will fill the logic gap between the idea that keeping prices high harms the
consumer and that companies should allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The conclusion is based on the assumption that companies have an obligation of some kind to do
what's best for the consumer.

(A) This does not address the moral obligation to the consumers (i.e. “should”) of the companies
who produced the patented technology, the main point of the conclusion. Furthremore, even if
companies could find legal ways to produce similar technologies, the patented technology could
still command exorbitant prices, thereby harming the consumer.

(B) CORRECT. The conclusion only makes sense if companies have an obligation to act in the
best interest of the customer, as this choice states.

(C) This generally follows along with the author's claim, but we are not required to assume this
in order to reach the conclusion that companies who are granted patents are obligated to look out
for the best interests of their customers.

(D) This addresses a tangential issue of whether or not consumers could notice the difference
between a new patented technology and a possible imitation. This does not address the core issue
of the obligation to the consumer.

(E) This does not address the obligation of the companies toward the consumers, or indeed the
companies at all.
_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Intern
Joined: 05 Jan 2010
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 4

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2010, 07:01
I think I'm a little over a year late on answering this one considering all of the other posts are from around March 2009... but needless to say the answer is B and the question type is an inference.

The argument is that patents harm consumers... hence, it's the company's responsibility to essentially share its patent with competitors for the benefit of the consumer. Which would mean that the author considers or is inferring that the ultimate responsibity of a company is the welfare of their consumer.
Manager
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 175
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 56 [1] , given: 5

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2010, 07:03
1
KUDOS
I chose A before seeing the official answer explanations and I still feel A as the best choice so I may be not learning anything here

if you take the whole argument, The whole argument will fail if companies find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.

so the argument presupposes choice A.

but if take the conclusion alone

Conclusion :
Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

then for this conclusion alone choice b seems to be valid.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
Intern
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 21
Schools: ISB
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2010, 07:29
Good explaination by technext !
Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 107
Location: United States
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 5

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2010, 09:34
I can see how you think A is right, but B presupposes more than A does. A is an assumption made by the argument but B addresses a more fundamental assumption that companies should do what is best for the consumer as opposed to the stockholder, etc.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 287 [2] , given: 9

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2010, 07:46
2
KUDOS
silasaaa2 wrote:
I chose A before seeing the official answer explanations and I still feel A as the best choice so I may be not learning anything here

if you take the whole argument, The whole argument will fail if companies find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.

so the argument presupposes choice A.

but if take the conclusion alone

Conclusion :
Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

then for this conclusion alone choice b seems to be valid.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.

keep in mind that an assumption is an unstated premise that allows the conclusion to be logically drawn from the premises.

if you negate and add option A to the argument, you can still draw the conclusion. Thus, A cannot be correct. I think this is an important lesson to learn from this problem.
Manager
Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 193
Location: Anchorage, AK
Schools: Mellon, USC, MIT, UCLA, NSCU
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2010, 21:11
B is the most logical and obvious assumption.
_________________

Reward wisdom with kudos.

Manager
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 175
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 56 [0], given: 5

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2010, 11:38
Thanks mike
Manager
Joined: 20 Oct 2009
Posts: 113
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 34 [10] , given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2010, 23:42
10
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Tough question at the first glance, but if you draw out the logic - it's pretty easy the answer should be B.

Company holds patents => Consumer lose ( high price) 1)
Patent expires => other manufacturer can produce => price drops ( relief on consumer loss)2)
1), 2)=> company should allow others to license patented technology

There is a gap here - why would company drop the profit that will be generated by the high price and by the monoplay? Because the company actually cares about the consumers.

A seems relevant but certainly not a necessary assumption.

(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
(C) Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
(D) The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
_________________

Dream the impossible and do the incredible.

Live. Love. Laugh.

Re: CR-Manhattan-Patented technology   [#permalink] 23 Jan 2010, 23:42

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 55 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Company A and Company B both produce gold watches 1 23 Apr 2016, 02:06
2 When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce 6 31 Dec 2012, 19:20
A life insurance company allows people to prepay their 4 18 Aug 2009, 09:25
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce 10 29 Dec 2006, 00:15
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce 18 15 Oct 2006, 11:44
Display posts from previous: Sort by