#25 - Concept Reference, Must Be True, Subject Perspective

[lathlee]

The back page says line 30-33 has the key reference to Answering this Q. .. The passage is about unauthorized digitization is not yet technically punished as a crime are a universal phenomenon. Some experts propose simply adding unauthorized digitalization to the list of activities prescribed under current law enforcement.

The Q and A of Q 25 are about unauthorized digitization users and how much-unauthorized digitization users are allowed to do ..it supports since entire passage makes clear that there is no such thing as a universal definition of copyrighted usage under internet.

so D) is more safe and correct answer than A.

I don't get why A) is the correct answer

[Adam Tyson]

Question 25 is about finding a compromise between internet users and publishers. The last lines of the passage tell us that the internet community views information as freely available to all, while publishers want to treat is as a commodity. I don't see the connection to lines 30-33 - where are you finding a reference to those lines? You said on the back page - the back page of what?

I see the evidence throughout the passage, but starting with the last sentence to help us understand the two sides that need a compromise. Answer A gives us that compromise by allowing anyone to access information on the internet (satisfying the first group) for a small fee (satisfying the second group).

[lathlee]

back page as 12-111. but Now i see, there was no line 30-33 supporting A) . sorry I misread for my defense, i was asking in late and was tired. Most importantly, Thank you so much for answering so late so i might get an important revelation for an important test

[BMM2021]

Hi, could answer A be elaborated a bit more?

I didn't like any of the answers, but I chose E because if you squint really hard it sort of fits into the "current" academic provisions of copyright law while also allowing internet users to simply claim they are conducting research and thereby get digitization rights for free. Not a pretty answer, and I didn't feel good about it at the time.

However, I had crossed out A as a contender largely because I felt there was simply no information regarding internet users' attitude towards paying fees to base any sort of related inference on. All we're told is that they are "accustomed to treating information as raw material available for everyone to use." In turn, I felt that assuming they would be willing to pay even a small fee for this information was a bridge too far - it felt like assuming people would be content to pay a small fee to breathe air. I understand air and copyrighted materials are different, but I just don't know how to assume that internet users in the wild days of the mid-90s thought of them differently, given the informational parameters of this passage.

Obviously, I'm wrong here. Just looking for some help understanding.

Thanks

[Adam Tyson]

The keys here are "compromise" and "small fee", BMM. Content creators want to exercise full ownership and retail all rights to copy things. You can't run my book through a copy machine and give it to your friends, so why should you be allowed to share copies of the Kindle version? Meanwhile, internet users want the wild west, where they can do what they want with no consequences.

Answer A is a compromise, because content creators are giving up some control and allowing others to make copies digitally. Users are giving up some of their freedom by paying a small fee. Neither side gets everything they want, but they both get some of what they want, which is the essence of compromise. Sounds like you were forgetting that compromise requires the users to give up a little something! Hey, a small fee is better than no access at all, right? In that sense, your air analogy is good - if I had a choice of no air or else a small fee, I suppose I would pay. Wouldn't you?

I also liked E briefly, but the problem is that it doesn't do anything to help anyone other than researchers. All the other users who want free stuff can't have anything at all. The creators have given up a little control, but many users of the internet get nothing that they want. And the publishers don't get anything for what they've given up, so it's not much of a win for them, either. Not much of to that compromise that anyone, other than researchers, should find acceptable.

[PresidentLSAT]

Hello Powerscore,

What would you say is the takeaway lesson from this question?

While A seemed like a plausible compromise, that wasn't enough information to infer that financial compensation would be enough. What if it was more about information integrity than money, and what if "the small" fee isn't enough of a compromise to offset what the publishing community would compromise? What lessons can we apply from here?

For my approach to this question, I thought, what cues can I gather from the passage that both parties would be okay with? We know the publishing community treats works as the owners' commodity. What wasn't clear and made E a tough choice was whether the publishing community was compromising if researchers had an exemption to these works, or if it was something they simply had to go with because it was the law.

B is wrong because this phenomenon already exists
C is wrong because the publishing community will definitely not agree with this under any circumstances, based on what we have gathered from the passage
D is also wrong because academics are already exempt from this.
E is weak, but A seemed more out of scope than E being weak

[Dana D]

Hello,

I would approach this question by clearly identifying the goals of the internet community versus the publishing community, and then finding the answer choice that is the best compromise between those two tensions (the desire for unrestricted free access of information for all vs. the commodification / ownership rights).

With this in mind, you can curtail some of the desire for additional information you sought with answer choice (A). As you said, it's a plausible compromise. We only have the information we're given in the passage; answer (A) satisfies copyright holders in the sense that they would be paid for access to their works, and satisfies internet users by allowing the information to remain accessible to all. The saying about compromises is that a good one means neither side is 100% satisfied - so here, we know this is a true compromise becuase the copyright holders are only going to get a "small" fee - the value of their work is likely reduced in the digital space. And Internet users are going to be unhappy because of this same fee - they want all info to be freely accessible, but they're going to have to settle with all information being accessible via a fee.

Be careful with your reasoning for other answer choices - you don't want to bring in outside information to the test. So answer choice (B) is not wrong because it's already illegal - it's wrong because this would completely prohibit non-academics from accesing copyrighted works. If the main tenant of the internet community is that material shoud be available to all, as lines (56-60) suggest, then this is not a strong answer choice. Answer choice (E) is similar to answer (B), where information is limited to a select population, so it is similarly not a strong compromise for internet users. Answer (D) is even more extreme, prohibiting all internet users from accessing information, but it's important to note that it is incorrect because of its broad restriction of data, not because academics are already excempt, as you stated.

Your reasoning for answer choice (C) is good and represents the type of thinking you want to apply to the rest of the answer choices.

Hope that helps!
Dana