单选题 Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation"s top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski , as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 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 rights 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 beat 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 Court 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 "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.

单选题 Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[解析] 细节题。题干问为什么商业专利在近来引起了关注，根据出题顺序，本题的答题区间在前两段。第一段主要讲在过去十年间，成千上万的商业方法被授予了专利。第二段第一句指出国家最高专利法庭准备缩减商业专利(scale back on business-method patents)。由此可见，C项“它们的授予可能受到限制”是对原文的同义置换，故为正确答案，restriction on相当于scale back on。A项“它们对企业的价值有限”，原文并未提到。B项“它们与资产配置相关”，利用第一段中出现的asset allocation形成干扰项，属于过度推断。D项“它们的获批引起争议”较有迷惑性，但原文说的是十年来一直争议不断，而题干问的是最近(recently)，因此属于偷换概念。

单选题 Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】[解析] 推断题。根据关键词Bilski case并结合出题顺序定位至第二段。第二段最后提到it has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents，D项是对此句的同义改写，may对应has the potential, change对应eliminate。因此，D项“它可能会改变美国已有的法律惯例”为正确答案。A项“对它的裁决符合法庭决议”、C项“它已经被联邦巡回法庭驳回”反向干扰，文中已暗示比尔斯基案的判决可能成为商业方法专利案件的转折点，因此它不会被驳回，而且它的判决与以往案例不同。B项“它涉及一项非常大的商业交易”，第二段末句提到Bilski case是a very big deal意思是“Bilski case非常重要的事”，而非“大的交易”，因此B项错误。

单选题 The word "about-face"(Para. 3) most probably means

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[解析] 含义题。根据题干定位到第三段。第一句提到：对商业方法专利权的限制(curbs on business-method claims)将会是一个a dramatic about-face，因为正是联邦巡回法院在1998年被称为“州街银行案”的决议中引入了这类专利，由此可见现在的做法与以前的做法是背道而驰的，即联邦巡回法院的态度发生了大的转变，因此选C项。A项“良好愿望的消失”、B项“敌意的增加”、D项“尊严的提升”都与原文毫无关系。

单选题 We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patents

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[解析] 推断题。根据题干定位到最后两段。最后一段第二句提到too many patents were being upheld for “inventions” that are obvious(太多显而易见的“发明”被授予了专利权)，言外之意就是很多发明本没有必要授予专利，即unnecessarily issued，因此B项为正确答案。A项“不受法律质疑的影响”，与原文表述明显相反。C项“降低专利持有人的尊严”，是对narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders的曲解。D项“增加了风险的发生率”无从推知，应该是对第四段第一句hedging risk(规避风险)出的干扰项。

单选题 Which of the following would be the subject of the text?

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】[解析] 主旨题。本文第一段讲过去十年中无数的商业方法被授予专利，第二段指出现在最高专利法庭准备减少这类专利的授予，第三段回顾过去表明这是法庭态度的重大转变，第五段又回到现在点明法庭的反专利倾向，因此全文主题应是“法庭准备限制商业方法专利”，A项“商业方法专利的潜在威胁”正确。B项“对商业方法专利持有人的保护”与主题无关。C项“有关商业方法专利的一个法律案例”仅是文中举的一个例子，并不能概括主题。D项“反对商业方法专利的流行趋势”较有迷惑性，但是prevailing这个词使得此项不能选，因为商业方法专利仅仅是“受到威胁”，还没有变成“普遍的、盛行的”趋势。