单选题 Vernon Bowman, a 75-year-old farmer from rural Indiana, did something that got him sued. He planted soybeans (大豆) sold as cattle feed. But Monsanto, the agricultural giant, insists it has a patent on the kind of genetically modified seeds Bowman used—and that the patent continues to all of the progeny (后代) of those seeds.
Have we really gotten to the point that planting a seed can lead to a high-stakes Supreme Court patent lawsuit? We have, and that case is Bowman vs. Monsanto, which is being argued on Tuesday. Monsanto's critics have attacked the company for its 'merciless legal battles against small farmers,' and they are hoping this will be the case that puts it in its place. They are also hoping the court's ruling will rein in patent law, which is increasingly being used to claim new life forms as private property.
Monsanto and its supporters, not surprisingly, see the case very differently. They argue that when a company like Monsanto goes to great expense to create a valuable new genetically modified seed, it must be able to protect its property interests. If farmers like Bowman are able to use these seeds without paying the designated fee, it will remove the incentives for companies like Monsanto to innovate.
Monsanto accused Bowman of patent infringement and won an $ 84 456 damage award. Rather than pay up or work out a settlement, Bowman decided to appeal—all the way to the Supreme Court. He said 'Monsanto should not be able, just because they've got billions of dollars to spend on legal fees, to try to terrify farmers into obeying their agreements by massive force and threats.'
The central issue in the case is whether patent rights to living things extend to the progeny of those things. Monsanto argues that its patents extend to later generations. But Bowman's supporters argue that Monsanto is trying to expand the scope of patents in ways that would enrich big corporations and hurt small farmers. They say that if Monsanto wins, the impact will extend far beyond agriculture—locking up property rights in an array of important areas. Knowledge Ecology International contends that the Supreme Court's ruling could have 'profound effects' on other biotech industries.
If this were a Hollywood movie, the courageous old Indiana farmer would beat the profit-minded corporation before the credits rolled. But this is a real-life argument before a Supreme Court that has a well-earned reputation for looking out for the interests of large corporations. This case gives the court an opportunity to rein in the growing use of patents to protect genetically engineered crops and other life forms—but the court may well use it to give this trend a powerful new endorsement.

单选题 Why did Vernon Bowman get sued?______

A、 He used genetically modified seeds to feed his cattle.
B、 He planted soybeans without paying for the patent.
C、 He made a profit out of Monsanto's commercial secrets.
D、 He obtained Monsanto's patented seeds by illegal means.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】由题干中的Vernon Bowman和sued定位到首段首句。推理判断题。定位句指出，Bowman因种植了作为牛饲料出售的大豆，遭到孟山都公司的起诉。接下来两句指出，该公司坚持认为其拥有Bowman使用的转基因种子的专利。由此推断，Bowman被起诉的原因是他没有付专利费就种植了大豆，故答案为B。 [参考译文] 印第安纳州75岁的农场主Vernon Bowman因其一些行为遭到了起诉。他种了作为牛饲料出售的大豆，但农业巨头孟山都公司坚持认为其拥有Bowman使用的转基因种子的专利——而且，该专利对种子的后代也有效。我们是否真的已经达到了播下一粒种子就能招致高风险的最高法院专利诉讼的地步?是的，Bowman与孟山都公司之间的案件就是这种情况，这一事件在周二引发了辩论。孟山都公司的批评者抨击该公司“对小农场主采取无情的法律斗争”，他们希望这个案件可以使其安分守己。他们同时希望法院的裁决可以约束专利法，因为目前越来越多的人滥用专利法将一些新生物列为私有财产。孟山都公司及其支持者自然对此案件持不同的观点。他们辩论说，像孟山都这样花费巨资开发出一种有价值的新转基因种子的公司，必须要保护自己的财产权益。如果像Bowman这样的农场主无需支付指定的费用就能使用这些种子，这将使像孟山都这样的公司失去创新的动力。孟山都公司控告Bowman侵犯专利法，并赢得了84456美元的赔偿。Bowman并没有付钱，也没有和解，相反，他决定上诉——一直告到了最高法院。他说：“孟山都公司不应该仅仅因为他们有数十亿美元的律师费用可花，就试图用强权和威胁恐吓农场主们服从他们的协议。” 该案件的核心问题是对某生物的专利权是否可以沿用到其后代上。孟山都公司争辩说，它拥有的专利应该适用于这些生物的后代。但Bowman的支持者却争辩说，孟山都正在试图扩大专利权，使大公司更富有，却伤害了小农场主的利益。他们表示，如果孟山都公司赢了，该影响将不仅仅局限于农业——一系列重要领域的诸多所有权将被锁定。知识生态学国际组织认为，最高法院的裁决可能会对其他生物技术产业产生“深远的影响”。如果这是一部好莱坞电影，那么这位勇敢的印第安纳老农一定会在影片的演职人员名单出现前，就把这个唯利是图的公司打倒了。然而这是现实生活中在最高法院前进行的一场辩论。最高法院以照顾大企业的利益而出名。利用专利保护转基因作物和其他生命形式的行为越来越多，该案例可以给法院一个控制这种趋势的机会，但法院也可能会借此机会对这种趋势给予新的强大支持。

单选题 What are Monsanto's critics hoping the Supreme Court will do?______

A、 Allow small farmers to grow genetically modified soybeans.
B、 Punish Monsanto for infringing on small farmers' interests,
C、 Rule against Monsanto's excessive extension of its patent rights.
D、 Abolish the patent law concerning genetically engineered seeds.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】由题干中的Monsanto's critics，hoping和the Supreme Court定位到第二段最后两句。推理判断题。定位句指出，孟山都公司的批评者抨击该公司“对小农场主采取无情的法律斗争”，他们希望这个案件可以使其安分守己。他们同时希望法院的裁决可以约束专利法，目前越来越多的人滥用专利法将一些新生物列为私有财产。由此可见，他们希望最高法院控制孟山都不断扩张的专利权范围，故答案为C。

单选题 What is the argument of Monsanto and its supporters?______

A、 Patent rights should be protected to encourage innovation.
B、 Bowman cannot plant the seeds without Monsanto's consent.
C、 Monsanto has the right to recover the costs of its patented seeds.
D、 Patent law on genetically modified seeds should not be challenged.

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】由题干中的argument和Monsanto and its supporters定位到第三段。事实细节题。该段最后两句指出，孟山都公司及其支持者认为，孟山都公司花费巨资开发出新转基因种子，必须要保护自己的财产权益，如果像Bowman这样的农场主无需支付指定的费用就能够使用这些种子，这将使像孟山都这样的公司失去创新的动力。由此可知，孟山都公司及其支持者认为专利权应该得到保护，以此来激励创新，故答案为A。

单选题 What is the key issue in the Bowman vs. Monsanto case?______

A、 Whether patent for seeds is harmful to agricultural production.
B、 Whether the biotech industry should take priority over agriculture.
C、 Whether measures should be introduced to protect small farmers.
D、 Whether patent for living things applies to their later generations.

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】由题干中的the key issue定位到第五段首句。事实细节题。定位句指出，该案件的核心问题是对某生物的专利权是否可以沿用到其后代上，故答案为D。

单选题 What do we learn from the last paragraph?______

A、 Hollywood movies usually have an unexpected, dramatic impact on real-life arguments.
B、 The Supreme Court will try to change its reputation for supporting large corporations.
C、 The Supreme Court is likely to persuade the parties concerned to work out a settlement.
D、 The ruling would be in Bowman's favor if the case were argued in a Hollywood movie.

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】由题干中的the last paragraph定位到最后一段。推理判断题。该段首句指出，如果这是一部好莱坞电影，这位勇敢的印第安纳州老农一定会在影片演职人员名单出现前，就把这个唯利是图的公司打倒了。由此可知，如果这场官司是在好莱坞电影中，判决一定对Bowman有利，故答案为D。