Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive pints to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might bent them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice。

The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court’s judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should “reconsider” its state street Bank ruling。

The Federal Circuit’s action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme. Count that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for “inventions” that are obvious. The judges on the Federal circuit are “reaction to the anti-patent trend at the supreme court” says Harole C Wegner, a par tend attorney and professor at Washington University Law School。

26. Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of

[A] their limited value to business [B] their connection with asset allocation

[C] the possible restriction on their granting [D] the controversy over authorization

27. Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?

[A] Its ruling complies with the court decisions [B] It involves a very big business transaction

[C] It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit [D] It may change the legal practices in the U.S。

28. The word “about-face”(Line 1, Paro 3)most probably means

[A] loss of good will [B]increase of hostility

[C]change of attitude [D] enhancement of disunity

29.We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patents

[A] are immune to legal challenges [B] are of ten unnecessarily issued

[C] lower the esteem for patent holders [D] increase the incidence of risks

30.Which of the following would be the subject of the text?

[A]A looming threat to business-method patents

[B]Protection for business-method patent holders

[C]A legal case regarding business-method patents

[D] A prevailing tread against business-method patents

Text 3

In his book The Tipping Point Malcolm Aladuell argues that social epidemics are driven in large part by the acting of a tiny minority of special individuals, often called influentials who are unusual informed, persuasive, or we connect. The idea is intuitively compelling but it doesn't explain how ideas actually spread。

The supposed importance of influentials derives from a plausible sounding but largely untested theory called the "tow-step flow of communication". Information flows from the media to the influentials and from them to everyone else. Marketers have embraced the two-step flow became it suggests that if they can just find and influence the influentials, those select people will do most of the work for them. The theory also seems to explain the sudden and unexpected popularity of people was wearing, promoting or developing whatever it is before anyone else paid attention. Anecdotal evidence of this kind fits nicely with the idea that only certain special people call drive trends。

In their recent work, however, some researchers have come up with the finding that influentials have far less impact on social epidemics than is generally supposed. In fact , they don’t seem to be required of all. The researchers' argument stems from a simple observation about social influence, with the exception of a few celebrities like Oprah Winfrey-whose outsize presence is primarily a function of media, not interpersonal influence-even the most influential members of a population simply don't interact with that many others. Yet it is precisely these non-celebrating influentials who according to the two-step-flow theory are supposed to drive social epidemics by influencing their friends and colleagues directly. For a social epidemic to occur however each person so affected must then influence his or her own acquaintances, who must in turn influence theirs and so on and just how many others pay attention to each of these people has little to do with the initial influential. If people in the network just two degrees removed from the initial influential prove resistant, for example from the initial influential, prove resistant, for example the cascade of change won't propagate very far or affect many people。

Building on the basic truth about interpersonal influence, the researchers studied the dynamics of populations manipulating a number of variables relating of populations, manipulating a number of variables relating to people’s ability to influence others and their tendency to be。

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] 下一页