The entertainment industry and
technology companies have been warring for years over the dazzling ability of
computers and the Internet to copy and transmit music and movies.
A crucial battle ended this week with a ruling by America's Supreme Court
in favour of copyright holder and against two companies that distribute
peer-to-peer (P2P) software, which lets users share files online with others.
The court's decision, though ostensibly a victory for content providers, is
nevertheless unlikely to stamp out file sharing -- much of which will continue
from outside America -- or stop the technological innovation that is threatening
the current business models of media firms. The court was asked
to decide whether two firms, Grokster and StreamCast, were liable for copyright
infringement by their customers. Two lower courts had said that the firms were
not liable, citing a 1984 ruling in favour of Sony's Betamax video recorder.
This held that a technology firm is immune from liability so long as the device
concerned is "capable of substantial noninfringing uses". The court did not
reinterpret the 1984 decision in light of the Internet. Instead the justices
ruled that the case raised a far narrower issue: whether Grokster and StreamCast
induced users to violate copyrights and chose not to take the simple steps
available to prevent it. Such behaviour would make the firms clearly liable for
copyright infringement and end their immunity, even under the Betamax standard.
The court reasoned that there were sufficient grounds to believe that inducement
occurred, and sent the case back to lower courts for trial.
Although the Grokster decision will probably not squelch innovation as
much as many tech firms fear, it should certainly make IT and electronics firms
more cautious about how they market their products --and quite right, too. But
the Supreme Court's narrow ruling makes this unlikely -- in- deed, the justices
noted the technology's widespread legitimate use. Yet their decision will surely
embolden the entertainment industry to pursue in court any firms that they can
claim knowingly allow infringement. This could kill off some small innovative
start-ups. On the other hand, the ruling could also provide legal cover for tech
firms with the wit to plaster their products with warnings not to violate the
law. But judged from a long-term perspective, this week's
victory for copyright holders seems likely to prove a Pyrrhic one. The Internet
and file sharing are disruptive technologies that give consumers vastly more
ability to use all sorts of media content, col0yrighted or not. Surely
entertainment firms must devise ways to use this technology to sell their wares
that will also allow copyright to be protected. So long as
technology continues to evolve in ways that enable legitimate content sharing,
piracy will also probably continue to some degree. Happily, in this case the
piracy seems to have prompted content fir-rug to compete by offering better
fee-based services. The challenge for content providers is to use new technology
to create value for customers, and to make those who use content illegally feel
bad about it.
单选题
The ruling of America's Supreme Court
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】本题问美国最高法院的裁决……。由关键词“the ruling of America's Supreme Court”可定位到第二段。第二段第二句中提到“，．．The court's decision．．．is nevertheless unlikely to stamp out file sharing”，这里“stamp out”意为“扑灭，踩灭”。可见B项“对文件共享影响甚小”正确。
[A]的确严厉打击了盗版业：尽管第二段首句提到裁决“in favor of copyright holder”，但由第二段第二句可知，这个裁决仅是一个表面上的胜诉，实际上无法扑灭“file sharing”，而“file sharing”正是一种重要的盗版方式。
[C]可能阻碍科技公司创新：由第四段首句中“．．．the Grokster decision will probably not squelch innovation as much as many tech firms fear…”可以看出这个裁决并不会对科技公司创新造成很大影响。实际上纵观全文也可以看出，作者认为技术的不断进步是不可阻挡的，因此在末段建议娱乐业放远眼光，提供更好的收费服务。这种不符合全文基本观点的选项一般不会是正确选项。
[D]会引导娱乐业走向繁荣：过于绝对。该裁决仅是表面上对娱乐业有利，并非真正的胜利。由末段可知，娱乐业还需要顺应形势，通过提供更好的收费服务来应对文件共享技术的发展。
单选题
The Grokster decision was based on the evidence that Grokster
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】本题问关于Grokster侵权的裁决的根据是什么。由关键词“Grokster”可定位到第三段。第三段第五句提到“The justices ruled that the case raised a far narrower issue：whether Grokster induced users to violate copyrights and chose not to take the simple steps available to prevent it”，可以看出法庭裁决的标准是看Grokster公司是否诱导用户侵权，是否采取措施阻止他们。结合第二段首句：Grokster输了官司，即该公司故意误导用户侵权且没有采取措施阻止他们。可以看出：Grokster允许用户不经许可地共享文件。故B项“允许用户不经许可地共享文件”正确。
[A]非法发布P2P软件：由第三段首句“The court was asked to decide whether Grokster was liable for copyright violation by their customers”知，本官司是讨论Grokster公司是否需要为他们用户的侵权行为负责，并非是否合法发布P2P软件的问题。本项也属常识项，P2P软件在某些国家被视为非法，出题人正是利用这一点设置本干扰项。
[C]侵犯了娱乐公司的版权：由第三段首句中“…was liable for copyright violation by their customers”可知，侵犯了版权的是Grokster公司的顾客，而不是公司本身。
[D]受益于Betamax标准：这是对第三段倒数第二句中“…even under the Betamax standard”的曲解。文中的意思是：即使该诉讼根据Betamax标准，也应判Grokster败诉。显然，受益于Betamax标准不是Grokster败诉的原因。
单选题
The word "Pyrrhic"(Line 2, Para. 5) can be substituted by
单选题
In the last paragraph, the author suggested that
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】本题问在最后一段作者提出……。末段谈到技术会继续发展，盗版现象也会继续存在下去。但是盗版也会促使娱乐公司提供更好的fee-based services，让顾客觉得物有所值，从而放弃盗版。最后谈到有些公司已开始意识到这点。可见，作者在本段主要是讨论娱乐公司应该提供更好的有偿使用以应对盗版。故D项“提供更好的付费服务以对付盗版”正确。
[A]一定程度的盗版应该提倡：末段首句中“…piracy will also probably continue to some degree”是指盗版会继续存在下去(而不是应该有盗版)，而盗版可以促进娱乐公司提供更好的收费服务。提供更好的服务是件好事，也是盗版产生的客观影响，但不能由此推出盗版本身是好事。实际上任何盗版行为都是不好的。像这种有悖常理，意义消极的项一般不会是正确答案。
[B]内容提供者要促进技术创新：末段第三句提到“The challenge for content providers is to use new technology to create value for customers”，这里作者建议内容提供者要利用新技术使消费者觉得合算，并不是要内容提供者去促进技术创新。
[C]娱乐公司要保护版权：在本段中作者并没有谈论要求娱乐公司去保护版权，保护版权是一件大事，不会是单单要求娱乐公司去做的事。作者提出的是要求娱乐业提供更好的收费服务来对付盗版。像这种泛泛而论的选项往往是错的。