ChaseDream

标题: 求问RC一道题目：关于专利的 [打印本页]

---

作者: 求上700    时间: 2019-11-7 16:25
标题: 求问RC一道题目：关于专利的
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 century 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 the 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.

[size=100%]The author of the passage cites which of the following as evidence challenging the argument referred to in line 14-15?                    

                    

                                                   
• AThe proportion of cases that were decided against patentees in the 1820s
                                                     
• BThe total number of patent disputes that were litigated from 1794 to 1830
                                                     
• CThe fact that later courts drew upon the legal precedents set in pre-1830 patent cases
                                                     
• DThe fact that the proportion of judicial decisions in favor of patentees began to increase during the 1830s
                                                     
• EThe constitutional rationale for the 1836 revision of the patent system
• 想问下大家为什么选C啊，还有第二段的第二句我没读懂是什么意思，能不能帮忙解答一下，不胜感激
  

---

作者: ripple_018    时间: 2019-11-8 11:55
我的理解是美国法律是判例制，就是之后的法庭审理会参考以前已经裁定的判例。回到c选项，如果说以前的审理不合理，那之后的法庭审理中，judge不会引用那些他们认为不合理的裁定作为当前诉讼的依据，但是文章指出被引用的1830以前的判例没有明显减少，所以认为那些判例在之后的judge眼中也是合理的。
就是这边说的内容
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.

第二段的第二句是哪些？。。你的标记看不是很明白

---

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)

Powered by Discuz! X3.3