单选题 Over the past decade, thousands of patents have seen granted for what are called business methods. Amazon. corn 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 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 Dernnis 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 pints to specific types of online transactions. Later, more 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 firms 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 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 ______.
[A] their limited value to business [B] their connection with asset allocation
[C] the possible restriction on their granting [D] the controversy over authorization
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[定位] 根据题干中的recently aroused concern，定位于第2段。文章第2段指出目前法院准备开始缩减商业模式专利的数量，而且会采用特殊的案例，引导人们对商业模式专利有一个更为广泛的理解，并且在最后一段还提到了too many patents were being upheld for“inventions”that are obvious，由此看出，法院准备修改审批专利的条件，从而达到阻止专利泛滥的现状，缩减专利数目。故选C。
[避错] 选项A：它们(专利)对商业价值的限制。文章中没有提到。选项B：它们(专利)与资产分配的关系。文章中提到资产分配，只是作为一项专利的案例来进行解说的，即用此来证明目前专利产品的泛滥，但这并非是引起人们对商业模式专利的关心的原因。选项D：对于授权的争议。根据第2段开始提到的，关于是否授权的争议已经进行了10年了，可见，这并非是造成recently所出现情况的原因，故排除。
[点睛] 本题在定位上，信息较隐蔽，需要结合选项，而且正确选项是对原文的概括，需要考生对文章内容有整体的把握。
单选题 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.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】[定位] 根据题干中的Bilski，定位于第2段。
[解析] 文章第2段最后指出，Bilski这一案件的潜在目的，是要消除所有的专利，即不再对专利提供特殊保护，但是在这之前，法律是对这些专利有保护的，可见该案件使得司法实践发生了改变。故选D。
[避错] 选项A：它的裁定符合法院的决定。文章并没有提到对该案件的判决。选项B：它涉及到了一笔很大的交易。该选项是对原文中a very big deal含义的歪曲，结合上下文可知，文章中a very big deal 的含义，是指该案件的影响重大，并非指“大交易”。
[避错] 选项C：联邦巡回法院不受理该案件。文章中没有提到。
[点睛] 本题选项C中的dismiss是法律术语，意为“不予受理”。
单选题 The word "about-face" (Line 1, Para. 3) most probably means ______.
[A] loss of good will [B] increase of hostility [C] change of attitude [D] enhancement of disunity
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[定位] 根据题干，可定位于第3段。
[解析] 根据该词所在句子发现，前面说的是现在法院提出要抑制商业模式专利，而后面又说在1998年时，正是法院批准了这种专利的出现。且结合dramatic一词，可以推断出这里是说法院的态度发生了完全的转变。故选C。
[避错] 选项A：失去了好的意愿。选项B：敌对情绪增加。选项D：促进了不统一。这三项均无法从文章中推出。
[点睛] 本题需要考生对上下文进行阅读，融会贯通，特别要抓住dramatic这个关键词。
单选题 We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patents ______.
[A] are immune to legal challenges [B] are often unnecessarily issued
[C] lower the esteem for patent holders [D] increase the incidence of risks
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】[定位] 根据题干，可定位于最后两段。
[解析] 文章最后一段指出，法院认为目前有很多专利都是很显而易见的“发明”，言外之意，很多专利根本称不上发明，都很简单，因此不应该批准其成为专利。故选B。
[避错] 选项A：不受法律挑战的影响。选项C：降低专利持有者的威望。选项D：增加事故风险。这三个选项文章都没有提及。
[点睛] 本题难度不大，定位比较容易，只要考生能够理解文章中的“inventions” that are obvious即可。
单选题 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.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[定位] 根据题干，需要纵观全文。
[解析] 主旨题。纵观全文，文章通篇都在讨论business-method patents所面临的问题，即专利泛滥，因此法院要采取措施整治。故应选A，商业模式专利所面临的威胁。
[避错] 选项B：对商业模式专利持有者的保护。文章中没有提及要对其提供保护，相反，是要开始整顿，降低对其的保护。选项C：关于商业模式专利的一个法律案件。本文的重点是通过对案件的介绍，来告诉读者其所带来的影响，而并非以介绍案件为目的。选项D：商业模式专利的流行趋势。文章没有提及。
[点睛] 本题难度不大，只要考生能够把握文章大意，就能概括出主旨。