Under United States law, a distinctive package design can be legally

Question

Under United States law, a distinctive package design can be legally protected against copying. Lorex shampoo, a leading brand, is packaged in a triangular-shaped bottle with a gold label. A major pharmacy chain has introduced a similar, less expensive shampoo in similarly shaped bottles with plain black-and-white labels carrying the chain's name. Though the triangular shape is distinctive, the manufacturer of Lorex has not legally challenged its use for the chain's shampoo.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest reason for the manufacturer of Lorex not to challenge the chain's use of the triangular package design?

A. The manufacturer of Lorex depends on sales on the willingness of the chain to stock Lorex and other of the manufacturer's products.

B. The black-and-white labeling of the chain's shampoo indicates to the consumer that irrelevant expense has been spared in order to bring the product to the consumer at a lower cost.

C. The cost of manufacturing the chain's shampoo is substantially lower than the cost of manufacturing Lorex.

D. Lawsuits brought for the purpose of protecting distinctive package designs are generally successful.

E. The manufacturer of Lorex also manufactures other shampoos, and those shampoos are not sold in triangular-shaped.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

Screenshot 2023-07-05 104128.png [ 96.9 KiB | Viewed 21488 times ]

Show Answer

Official Answer

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Pro tip: Combine official questions for familiarity with GMAT Club Tests for analytics and tougher Focus-level practice so the real exam feels manageable. Explore →

MartyMurray · Accepted Answer

Under United States law, a distinctive package design can be legally protected against copying. Lorex shampoo, a leading brand, is packaged in a triangular-shaped bottle with a gold label. A major pharmacy chain has introduced a similar, less expensive shampoo in similarly shaped bottles with plain black-and-white labels carrying the chain's name. Though the triangular shape is distinctive, the manufacturer of Lorex has not legally challenged its use for the chain's shampoo.

The passage provides only facts and not a conclusion.

Then, the question asks us to find a reason for the manufacturer of Lorex NOT to challenge the chain's use of the triangular package design.

So, we can treat this question as a Strengthen the Argument question in which we must find a choice that supports the implied conclusion that the manufacturer should not challenge the chain's use of the design.

A. The manufacturer of Lorex depends on sales on the willingness of the chain to stock Lorex and other of the manufacturer's products.

This choice may seem a bit off topic since it's not about packaging.

Notice, however, that this choice does provide a reason for the manufacturer not to challenge the chain's use of the package design. After all, if the manufacturer of Lorex depends on the willingness of the chain to stock the manufacturer's products, then it may not be in the best interests of the manufacturer of Lorex to challenge the chain's use of the design. After all, the chain might retaliate by refusing to stock the manufacturer's products.

So, even though this choice does not discuss packaging, it does do what the correct answer must do, which is provide support for the conclusion that the manufacturer should not challenge the chain's use of the design.

Keep.

B. The black-and-white labeling of the chain's shampoo indicates to the consumer that irrelevant expense has been spared in order to bring the product to the consumer at a lower cost.

If anything, this choice provides a reason for the manufacturer TO challenge the chain's use of the design.

After all, this choice indicates that the chain is using the design and at the same time using a label that causes Lorex to be compared unfavorably in terms of cost with the chain's product.

So, this choice does the opposite of what we need.

Eliminate.

C. The cost of manufacturing the chain's shampoo is substantially lower than the cost of manufacturing Lorex.

This choice may explain why the chain's shampoo is less expensive than Lorex: it costs less to produce.

At the same time, we don't need an explanation. We need a reason for the manufacturer not to challenge the chain's use of the design, and the fact that the cost of manufacturing the chain's shampoo is substantially lower than the cost of manufacturing Lorex is not a reason not to challenge the chain's use of the design.

Eliminate.

D. Lawsuits brought for the purpose of protecting distinctive package designs are generally successful.

This choice indicates that, if the manufacturer challenges the chain's use of the design, the manufacturer's challenge will likely be successful.

If anything that information is a reason TO challenge the design. After all, it makes more sense to do something that will likely be successful than to do something that is not likely to be successful.

So, this choice does the opposite of what we need.

Eliminate.

E. The manufacturer of Lorex also manufactures other shampoos, and those shampoos are not sold in triangular-shaped bottles.

This choice has no clear effect on the case for the manufacturer's not challenging the chain's use of the design. After all, regardless of the fact that the manufacturer manufactures other shampoos, it still may or may not make sense for the manufacturer to challenge the chain's use of the design of the the Lorex bottle.

People sometimes choose this choice because it's the last one in the question or because they make up an extended, "suppose this ... suppose that" story about this choice. So, to avoid choosing a choice like this one, we have to be careful not to make up unsupported stories.

Eliminate.

The correct answer is (A).

achloes · Answer

MasteringGMAT  is this a question by GMAC? I ask because the question has been tagged "GMAT Prep" but I'm unable to find it anywhere else except here. Thanks!

MasteringGMAT · Answer

Yes, this question was introduced by GMAC in the ' Focus Edition '.

Kapil1650 · Answer

I chose A as all other options didn’t seem to be right, still unable to comprehend option A though!!

Posted from my mobile device

achloes · Answer

Glad I'm not the only one!

MasteringGMAT  would you mind double checking the text for option A? It appears that there are multiple typos in the sentence.

MasteringGMAT · Answer

here's a snippet from the original question!

yeloo · Answer

Kapil1650   achloes 
 
Yes this is an official qsn on the New FOCUS edition of GMAT prep

We are trying to find a reason why Lorex is not challenging Chain's use of triangular packaging , even though the packaging is distinctive and US Laws allow protection against copying distinctive packaging
 
Option A looks convincing if Lorex would file a complaint against the Chain, then the chain might stop keeping stock of Lorex's products. This would lead to decrease in sales for Lorex and would be unprofitable. So we keep A.

The language might seem confusing but it simply states that sales of Lorex are dependent on the Chain's willingness to stock(sell) Lorex products.

Option B shows that chain is doing things right to keep the cost down. This is something in favour of the Chain and Lorex agreeing to this would be absurd.
Option c is out for the same reasons as B
Option D states that lawsuits are successful so why wouldn't Lorex file the same. Take option D and throw it out
Option E is again absurd.

Hope this helped

GmatKnightTutor · Answer

Interesting question. You have a COMPANY that makes shampoo in fancy triangle packaging - and a PHARMACY CHAIN that makes shampoo in plain triangle packaging. Currently, the pharmacy chain sells both these shampoos at its outlets. Although there may be a legal case to stop the pharmacy chain from using the same packaging shape, a company would probably not want to anger someone it is reliant on to stock its product. Answer choice (A) really emphasizes the importance of this chain to the company in this regard.

Basically, in a sense, the implication is that the company doesn't want to sue because it doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds it.

Paras96 · Answer

A. The manufacturer of Lorex depends on sales on the willingness of the chain to stock Lorex and other of the manufacturer's products.

This answer provides the strongest reason for the manufacturer of Lorex not to challenge the chain's use of the triangular package design. If the manufacturer depends on the willingness of the chain to stock its products, including Lorex shampoo, then challenging the chain's use of the distinctive package design could potentially strain their relationship. The manufacturer might be concerned that taking legal action could lead to the chain refusing to stock their products, thereby negatively impacting their sales and market presence. This option provides a practical business reason for the manufacturer's decision not to challenge the use of the package design.

siddharth_ · Answer

Hi experts 
Can you please clarify the phrase “on sales on the willingness”?
 KarishmaB   GMATNinja

KarishmaB · Answer

A distinctive package design can be legally protected against copying. Lorex shampoo, has a triangular-shaped bottle with a gold label. A major pharmacy chain has introduced a similar, less expensive shampoo with plain black-and-white labels the triangular shape is distinctive Unexpected Outcome: the manufacturer of Lorex has not legally challenged its use for the chain's shampoo. We have to resolve the paradox. Why has the Lorex manufacturer not legally challenged the chain? A. The manufacturer of Lorex depends on sales on the willingness of the chain to stock Lorex and other of the manufacturer's products. The wording is a bit off - perhaps it is actually 'for sales'. It says that the Lorex manufacturer depends on the chain for sale of his products. The chain stocks his products and sells them. This could be a good reason why Lorex did not file a legal complaint. Filing a complaint may lead to huge financial losses because the chain may refuse to stock its products, losses much larger than what the chain may take away with a similar bottle of shampoo. B. The black-and-white labeling of the chain's shampoo indicates to the consumer that irrelevant expense has been spared in order to bring the product to the consumer at a lower cost. This makes the chain's shampoo more attractive to consumers compared to Lorex and is a reason to file the complaint. C. The cost of manufacturing the chain's shampoo is substantially lower than the cost of manufacturing Lorex. Irrelevant. The point is why the copying of design has not been challenged. D. Lawsuits brought for the purpose of protecting distinctive package designs are generally successful. More of a reason to file a complaint. E. The manufacturer of Lorex also manufactures other shampoos, and those shampoos are not sold in triangular-shaped. Irrelevant. Answer (A) Here is a discussion on explain the paradox questions: https://youtu.be/7mckzPg-xjo

ameya.satyawadi · Answer

It took me some time to realise that the chain in the question and option A are the same since it is too ambiguous. Will these questions in GMAT ficus occur where there is so much ambiguity?

miag · Answer

Hi,

Perhaps you could help clarify a bit further where you thought there was ambiguity? I would say the passage and question stem are quite clear, and if you follow the author's reasoning to the conclusion, you can easily elliminate all except A) {this is the only one that gives a reason as to why Lorex might not challenge the chain's use of the triangular design}.  MartyMurray  has explained it above pretty well.

MartyMurray · Answer

A word like "the" in "the chain" in choice (A) is what we can call a "look-above marker."

The use of the word "the" indicates that "the chain" mentioned in the answer choice is the same as some chain mentioned previously. So, to see what chain choice (A) is about, we "look above" in the text to see. Since the only chain mentioned in the text above, in the passage, is the "major pharmacy chain," we can safely presume that "the chain" in (A) is the pharmacy chain mentioned in the passage.

Some other look-above markers that we often see in GMAT questions are "this," "these," and "such."

Example:
 
In the 1960s, many musicians saw what the Beatles had achieved and decided to use elements of the Beatles' formula for success to further their own careers. At the same time, what the Beatles had that some of  these  musicians lacked was the ability to perform songs in a polished manner in a recording studio.

In the above example, we see that the look above marker "these" in "these musicians" indicates that "these musicians" refers to the "many musicians" mentioned earlier.

Borrat · Answer

Under United States law, a distinctive package design can be legally protected against copying. Lorex shampoo, a leading brand, is packaged in a triangular-shaped bottle with a gold label. A major pharmacy chain has introduced a similar, less expensive shampoo in similarly shaped bottles with plain black-and-white labels carrying the chain's name. Though the triangular shape is distinctive, the manufacturer of Lorex has not legally challenged its use for the chain's shampoo.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest reason for the manufacturer of Lorex not to challenge the chain's use of the triangular package design?

A. The manufacturer of Lorex depends on sales on the willingness of the chain to stock Lorex and other of the manufacturer's products.

B. The black-and-white labeling of the chain's shampoo indicates to the consumer that irrelevant expense has been spared in order to bring the product to the consumer at a lower cost.

C. The cost of manufacturing the chain's shampoo is substantially lower than the cost of manufacturing Lorex.

D. Lawsuits brought for the purpose of protecting distinctive package designs are generally successful.

E. The manufacturer of Lorex also manufactures other shampoos, and those shampoos are not sold in triangular-shaped.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

Screenshot 2023-07-05 104128.png [ 96.9 KiB | Viewed 21488 times ]

Show Answer

Official Answer

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Pro tip: Combine official questions for familiarity with GMAT Club Tests for analytics and tougher Focus-level practice so the real exam feels manageable. Explore →

Under United States law, a distinctive package design can be legally

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Under United States law, a distinctive package design can be legally

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia