单选题 Deep-fried beer may sound scrumptious, but is it patentable? Mark Zable, an inventive Texan, thinks it is. To protect his novel production process, which involves encasing the alcohol in batter and dunking it in a fryer, he recently applied for a patent. He wants to profit if others exploit his beery brainwave. Without patents to protect their creations, inventors would have little incentive to invent. But some Americans fret that patent protection has grown too strong. The system breeds so many lawsuits, they worry, that it throttles the innovation it is supposed to promote.
Consider a suit filed on August 27th by Interval Licensing, a firm owned by Paul Allen, a cofounder of Microsoft. It targets everyone who is anyone in Silicon Valley, including Google, Apple, eBay, Yahoo! and Facebook. (But not Microsoft. ) It involves four patents covering inventions that improve an internet user's online experience, such as suggestions for further reading related to a news article and pop-up features that display share prices. Interval claims these were pioneered at Mr. Allen's now defunct Silicon Valley research laboratory and then patented between 2000 and 2004. It accuses each of its targets of violating one or more of the patents.
Their response has been swift. Facebook called the suit "completely without merit" while Google harrumphed about "people trying to compete in the courtroom instead of the marketplace". In private, some executives accuse Mr. Allen of behaving like a "patent troll"—a name given to firms that buy up patents solely in order to squeeze money out of companies that allegedly infringe them. Tech firms like trolls about as much as the Billy Goats Gruff did. An aggressive troll can hold up a billion-dollar product over a patent worth a fraction of that.
By that strict definition, Mr. Allen is not a troll. The suit involves advances that Interval says were made in Mr. Allen's own lab, not someone else's. But the case does have some trollish features, say Mr. Allen's critics. Why, they ask, did Interval wait so long to assert its rights? Was it tempted by the large piles of cash that so many tech firms built up during the downturn?
"Successful tech companies undoubtedly face a problem with out-of-the-blue patent suits," says Michael Jacobs of Morrison & Foerster, a law firm, who notes that the vast majority of cases end up producing formal licensing deals of some kind or other. According to PatentFreedom, a body that tracks the activity of what it calls "non-practising entities", or outfits such as Acacia Research that collect patents without intending to use the underlying technology in products, the number of court cases brought by them has risen sharply, from 109 in 2001 to 470 last year.
Efforts to address this problem through the courts have so far failed. Legislation designed to improve matters is still stuck in Congress. So companies are looking for other ways to protect themselves. RPX, a firm that specialises in "defensive buying" of potentially problematic tech patents, has seen its client base more than double this year to almost 60 companies, including Dell and HewlettPackard. The firm licenses its entire portfolio of 1,500 or so patents and rights to its members in return for an annual fee based on their operating income. John Amster, RPX's boss, says that although the firm can't eliminate patent risk, it offers a cost-effective way to reduce it. That is worth celebrating—perhaps with a deep-fried beer.

单选题 In the opening paragraph, the author introduces his topic by ______.
A. explaining a phenomenon B. making a comparison
C. posing a contrast D. the example of Mark Zable
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[解析] 本题就引入主题的方式提问。第一段先举了一个例子:Zable为了保护他油炸啤酒的制作工艺而申请了专利,接着文章指出,如果没有专利保护,发明家就会失去创造的动力,最后作者指出有些美国人担心专利保护过度,反而会扼杀创新,而不是促进创新。作者通过两种截然相反的观点形成对比,揭示出文章主题。因此选c项。原文虽提到了油炸啤酒的例子,并指出它申请了专利保护的解释,但并未就此提出主题,故排除A、D两项。making a comparison意为“进行比较”,强调共性,故不符合文意。
单选题 From the text, why did some executives call Mr. Allen a "patent troll"?
A. Because four patents involved in the suit were patented by Interval Licensing.
B. Because the advances involved in the suit were made in Mr. Allen's own lab.
C. Because he wants to make profits when others exploit his patents.
D. Because the Interval waited so long to assert its rights.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[解析] 根据题干定位到第三段第三句,句中破折号后对“patent troll”进行了解释说明,指收购专利只是为了指控别的公司侵犯专利权来榨取金钱的公司。而为什么将Alien也称为“patent troll”需要结合文中具体事件加以解释。因为硅谷的多家公司违反了Alien所注册的一项或多项专利权,结合文中提到的相关解释,可以得出,因为Allen注册的专利被他人使用,一些高管认为他提出诉讼的目的还是赚钱,与“patent troll”极为相似,所以也称其为“patent troll”,故选C项。A属于无关干扰项,B反向干扰,这是Allen不是专利流氓的原因。D也不是该问题的原因。
单选题 Which of the following is true of the text?
A. The system of patent protection promotes innovation.
B. Mr. Allen's Silicon Valley research lab still exists.
C. The author believes Interval Licensing's suit have some trollish features.
D. RPX has come up with an efficient way to reduce patent risk.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】[解析] 这种题要求考生对全文有综合性的理解,解题时用排除法和定位法。A项与文章首段最后一句相违背,故排除;第二段的倒数第二句提到陔实验室已经解散,B选项与文意相反,故排除;通过第四段第三句可知这种观点是Allen的反对者提出的,故排除C;根据最后一段,可以看出RPX公司的做法可以极大地减少专利权诉讼案件的发生,作者显然也同意这一观点,故选D。
单选题 What is the author's attitude towards patent protection?
A. Supportive. B. Skeptical. C. Impartial. D. Biased.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】[解析] 文章开篇即引人了对待专利保护的两种截然相反的态度,接着以Allen上诉案件为例,先阐述了众公司部分高管以及其反对者的看法及怀疑。第五、六段,作者就目前的形势谈到如何解决问题,并列举了一种利用性价比高的方式降低风险,最后作者表明了态度,称这种方式值得庆祝。可见作者对专利保护提出了质疑,认为它并非总是促进发明的动力,有时也会带来许多不必要的麻烦。故B正确。A意为“支持的”;C意为“公正的,不偏袒的”;D意为“有偏见的”。
单选题 Which of the following would be the best title?
A. Does the Patent Protection Work Well?
B. Enhance the Patent Protection
C. Please Pay for the Use of the Patent
D. The Fierce Patent Competition in Internet Companies
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 本文第一段提出有关专利保护有可能存在的两种态度——鼓励或者扼杀创新。第二段至第四段,针对有关专利保护的Allen事件,作者阐述了被起诉的众公司、某些高管以及Allen反对者的观点。第五段指出因为专利保护过度引起的纠纷处于上升趋势。第六段针对这种专利权起诉提出了应对方案。所以本文围绕专利权保护问题,采取先提出问题、然后说明问题、最后解决问题的论述策略,故选A。B项过度引申。文章中虽然表明作者对当前专利保护滥用的批判态度,但是文章整篇在讲专利权保护问题。若选B项,文中应该具体列举出专利保护的不足之处和一些改善的方法或建议。C项无中生有,偏离主题。文中并没有说其他公司应该为专利权使用付钱。D项无中生有,事实干扰。当前网络公司的专利竞争的确激烈,但这并不是文章的中心主旨。