Negation B - Law exists other than copyright laws and patent laws that protect the profit rights of computer software writers in Jawade.
The conclusion - profit rights of computer software writers are not protected is destroyed.

gtr02 wrote:

See attached LSAT CR

i'm looking for the correct negation that will kill the conclusion!

OA: b

The last premise in your argument states: "... the courts determined that information written for a machine does not fit into either the copyright or the patent category" The conclusion made by the author is incomplete. That is it could have been well refuted with the sentence following the last premise, such as: "Although the information written for a machine is not suitable for interpretation by the use of copyright and/or patent legal elements, it should be interpreted by the use of this and that law..."

The last premise has left the argument's conclusion door open. We should not generalize about the argument and its premises. The conclusion should be killed with two pieces of information at hand:

- incomplete argument structure to support conclusion, missing possible premises;
- opposite facts presented-imbalance between two different fact sets, possible problems with the fact test; one set of premises state legal protection for writers and inventors, the other premise targets software writers which are left with no legal protection.

IMO the answer is B

Evidence:

Copyright laws protect writers's right to profits

Patent laws protect inventor's right to profits

Computer Software writers's are covered by neither copyright nor patent laws.

Conclusion:

The CS writer's profit rights remain unprotected.


Clearly, the logic of the questions implies that no other law protects profit rights of these CS writers.If it doesn't the argument can't conclude that these CS writers' profit rights remain unprotected.


A) The question is about and not about future.The conclusion clearly says "remain protected (till now implied" and not " will remain unprotected (a prediction).

B) Correct. A correct match of our paraphrase

C) That CS is imported has no bearing in the argument.The issue at hand is the protection of profit rights of these softwares and not of the source of these CS.

D) It actually contradicts the evidence.Remember the answer choices can't contradict the evidence.The evidence is clearly stating that CS are different from both copyright laws and patent laws.

E) Whether the copyright laws and patent laws have been modified or not has no bearing on this argument.

Also even if you negate this statement,you can still conclude that "CS remain unprotected" for the reason:

The modifications may have been in other sections of these laws.You can't assume that these changes were made after the court ruling because this is not stated.

In other words,E doe not kill the argument.Hence E is incorrect.