The following appeared as part of an article in a trade publication.
Stronger laws are needed to protect new kinds of home-security systems from being copied and sold by imitators. With such protection, manufacturers will naturally invest in the development of new home-security products and production technologies. Without stronger laws, therefore, manufacturers will cut back on investment. From this will follow a corresponding decline not only in product quality and marketability, but also in production efficiency, and thus ultimately a loss of manufacturing jobs in the industry.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The author of this article warns that stronger laws are needed to protect new kinds of home security systems from being copied and sold by imitators in order to prevent an eventual loss of manufacturing jobs within the industry. This conclusion is based on the following chain of reasoning: With the protection of stronger laws, manufacturers will naturally invest in the development of new home security products and production technologies, whereas without such protection, manufacturers will cut back on investment. If manufacturers cut back on investment, then a decline in product quality and marketability, as well as in production efficiency, will result. This, in turn, will cause the predicted loss of industry jobs. This line of reasoning is unconvincing for several reasons.
To begin with, the author assumes that existing copyright, patent and trade secret laws are inadequate to protect home security system design. But the author never explains why these laws dont offer sufficient protection, nor does he offer any evidence to show that this is the case.
Secondly, the argument depends on the twin assumptions that stronger legal protection will encourage manufacturers to invest in home security-system production, while the absence of strong legal protection will have the opposite effect. The author fails to provide any evidence or reasons for accepting these assumptions about cause-and-effect connections between the law and what happens in the marketplace.
Moreover, both of these assumptions can be challenged. It is possible that stronger protections would not greatly affect industry investment or jobs overall, but would instead help to determine which companies invested heavily and, therefore, provided the jobs. For instance, a less-restricted market might foster investment and competition among smaller companies, whereas stronger legal protections might encourage market domination by fewer, larger companies.
In conclusion, I do not find this argument compelling. The author must provide evidence that home security system designs are not being adequately protected by current patent, copyright or trade secret laws. The author must also provide an argument for the assumptions that stronger laws will create more industry jobs overall, while the absence of stronger laws will result in fewer industry jobs.
6月24日新四级翻译参考答案及评析
专家提醒大学英语四级短文听力训练四大误区
2013年12新六级作文范文高手版
大学英语四六级考试易筋经秘诀
五大妙招有助你顺利通过大学英语四级考试
王兆飞六级写作翻译复习方法及应试技巧
名师谈2013年12月23日新英语四六级考前冲刺!
我看四六级单词最基础得是阅读者得天下
优化英语四六级CET单词记忆二十法
找准信号词
名师王茜解析新四六级听力和作文比重提高
名师解析征服大学英语四级考试写作篇
新英语四级考试听力的题型浅析
四六级名师写作阅读最易提高且揭秘作文阅卷
英语六级词汇题高分路线图计划一
考级王谢忠明全面解读英语四级的新题型
英语新四级难度不高听说读写译各个击破
备考实用四六级写作的二项基本原则
名师访谈最后一天该怎么攻克四六级
13年6月24日新四级完形填空评析
怎样让自己占据英语四六级考场上的主动权
英语四级听力复习葵花宝典且每个月侧重点不同
听力阅读和写作帮你应对新四级
2013年12月英语新老六级改错评析及应试策略
专家支招6月23日英语新四级冲刺的备考方略
傅思遥六级听力复习方法及应试技巧
张登六级阅读复习方法及应试技巧
英语新四级考前综合分析四大题型解读
最新预测6月17日四级考试作文附范文
名师全面点评英语新六级考试样题的各题型
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |