建议使用官方纸质指南,查看对照完整题目
Because the framers of the United States Constitution (written in 1787) believed that protecting property rights relating to inventions would encourage the new nation’s economic growth, they gave Congress—the national legislature—a constitutional mandate to grant patents for inventions. The resulting patent system has served as a model for those in other nations. Recently, however, scholars have questioned whether the American system helped achieve the framers’ goals. These scholars have contended that from 1794 to roughly 1830, American inventors were unable to enforce property rights because judges were “antipatent” and routinely invalidated patents for arbitrary reasons. This argument is based partly on examination of court decisions in cases where patent holders (“patentees”)brought suit alleging infringement of their patent rights. In the 1820s, for instance, 75 percent of verdicts were decided against the patentee.The proportion of verdicts for the patentee began to increase in the 1830s, suggesting to these scholars that judicial attitudes toward patent rights began shifting then.
Not all patent disputes in the early nineteenth entury were litigated, however, and litigated cases were not drawn randomly from the population of disputes. Therefore the rate of verdicts in favor of patentees cannot be used by itself to gauge changes in judicial attitudes or enforceability of patent rights. If early judicial decisions were prejudiced against patentees, one might expect that subsequent courts—allegedly more supportive of patent rights—would reject the former legal precedents. But pre-1830 cases have been cited as frequently as later decisions, and they continue to be cited today,suggesting that the early decisions, many of which clearly declared that patent rights were a just recompense for inventive ingenuity,provided a lasting foundation for patent law.The proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of a change in the underlying population of cases brought to trial. This change was partly due to an 1836 revision to the patent system:an examination procedure, still in use today, was instituted in which each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law. Previously,patents were automatically granted upon payment of a $30 fee.
【OG20-P454-591题】
The passage implies that which of the following was a reason that the proportion of verdicts in favor of patentees began to increase in the 1830s ?
-
分析A选项xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
分析B选项xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
分析C选项xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
分析D选项xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
分析E选项xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



题干KW:(推断题)reason proportion of verdicts in favor of patentees
定位:第一次定位到第一结构第二层,没有提及原因。定位到第二结构第四层。
第二结构
(4)给出the proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of…….的原因
定位到第二结构第4层次。
错误选项特征:
B.patent law during 1830层次未提及
C.Judges 层次未提及
D.litigated 层次未提及
E.patent dipute层次未提及,且与文章内容不符。
正确选项特征:
A.是层次内容This change was partly due to an 1836 revision to the patent system: an examination procedure, still in use today, was instituted in which each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law.的同义转换
题目讨论 (7条评论)

-
leon小恶魔
each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law
0
0 回复 2022-06-03 15:40:41
-
ziqi
The proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of a change in the underlying population of cases brought to trial. 原文是说change,与E选项increase不同,注意这个考点。Adherence to patent law符合专利法
0
0 回复 2022-04-11 11:02:15
-
正在加速小流星
对应文中的这句话The proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of a change in the underlying population of cases brought to trial,为啥不选e
0
0 回复 2022-02-08 18:09:25
-
180687pkqh回复正在加速小流星
原文说的是change,不是选项E里的increase;并且change没有强调是after 1836。 A选项就是原文的改写(This change was partly due to an 1836 revision to the patent system:an examination procedure was instituted in which each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law.)
0
0 回复 2022-04-04 16:16:29
-
271355uxi回复正在加速小流星
原文population of cases brought to trial;选项 proportion of patent disputes brought to trial。数量和比例的区别。
0
0 回复 2022-06-21 16:38:01
-
-
水寒528
framers因为想要有economic growth 所以立法专利法,这被其他国家也给用了,增强立法的意义 scholars质疑没有达成增强经济的目的,因为法官反对专利,用court decisions来支持法官反对。举例1820s,说明专利法在所有verdict中所占比例上升,意味者法官态度变化 第二段反驳,专利案子增多这比例说明不了什么,法官态度没有改变。Pre 1830的案子还是立法的基础,所以因为总体案子多了,专利案子也多了,这是因为1836的改革
0
0 回复 2021-08-10 14:57:50
-
寂岳
1.有生词不认识,有些质疑对文章的理解。2.不理解的情况下如何做对题(不要否认这也是一种能力,在应试教育下这是你应该培养出来的能力)
1
0 回复 2021-03-24 12:26:21
-
anthony2333
细节题,问的是1830s开始维护专利所有者的裁决比例变高的原因,定位The proportion ofjudicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of a change in the underlying population of cases brought to trial. This change was partly due to an 1836 revision to the patent system: an examination procedure, still in use today, was instituted in which each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law. Previously, patents were automatically granted upon payment of a $30 fee.这段话
A. Patent applications approved after 1836 were more likely to adhere closely to patent law. 正确,1836年增加了专利诉讼的审查步骤,通过审查的诉讼申请是更符合专利法规定的,所以裁决时也更可能维护专利所有者的利益。
B. Patent laws enacted during the 1830s better defined patent rights.
无中生有
C. Judges became less prejudiced against patentees during the 1830s.
这是学者的解释,被作者反驳了,而题目问的是文章也就是作者的观点
D. After 1836, litigated cases became less representative of the population of patent disputes.
无中生有
E. The proportion of patent disputes brought to trial began to increase after 1836.
文章说1836年增加了审查机制,也就是能上法庭参与裁决的诉讼比例降低了,把不符合要求的一批诉讼申请预先排除掉了。该选项和文章信息相反。
选A
0
0 回复 2018-11-29 16:39:51
-
adsdsd
The proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s because of a change in the underlying population of cases brought to trial. This change was partly due to an 1836 revision to the patent system: an examination procedure, still in use today, was instituted in which each application is scrutinized for its adherence to patent law.
0
0 回复 2016-09-11 11:00:02