题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
My patents had trouble ______ living in any new place.
A．according to
B．adjusting to
C．to adapt to
D．to turn to
简答题官方参考答案
（由简答题聘请的专业题库老师提供的解答）
更多“My patents had trouble ______ living in any new place.A．according toB．adjusting toC．to ada”相关的问题
A. She encouraged the Nobel family to make as many patents as possible.
B. She effeeted the change in Nobel"s policy and had protests against war.
C. She helped Alfred Nobel with many of his inventions.
D. She was influential in the building of many laboratories in 90 countries.
One suggestion was that the nation observe a minute or two of total blackout(停电). All electric power would be shut off in homes, streets and factories. Perhaps this suggestion plan made Americans realize fully what Edison and his inventions meant to them. Electric power was too important to the country. Shutting it off even a short time would have led to complete confusion. A blackout was out of the question.
On the day of Edison's funeral(葬礼), many people silently dimmed their lights. In this way they honored the man who had done more than anyone else to put the great force of electricity at his countrymen's fingertips.
Which of the following statement is true according to the first paragraph？
A．Edison received the first American patent.
B．Edison got the most patents in America at that time.
C．Edison was the only American inventor.
D．Edison was the first American inventor.
完成下列各题 D
Thomas Alva Edison was awarded more patents on inventions than any other American． When he died in l931，Americans wondered how they could best show their respect for him． One suggestion was that the nation observe a minute or two of total black-out．All electric power would be shut off in homes streets and factories． Perhaps this suggestion made Americans realize fully what Edison and his inventions meant to them．Electric power was too important to the country．Shutting it off for even a short time would have led to complete confusion．A black—out was out of the question． On the day of Edison's funeral，many people silently dimmed their lights．In this way they honored the man who had done mroe than anyone else to put the great force of electricity at his countrymen's fingertips． People decided to honor Edison when_________．
A.he made the first electric light
B.electric power was l00 years old
C.the country realized electricity's importance
D.he died in 1931
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, 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 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.
Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of ______.
A．their limited value to businesses.
B．their connection with asset allocation.
C．the possible restriction on their granting.
D．the controversy over their authorization.
The study found that young researchers, those who publish【53】, and investigators seeking patents are most likely to be【54】access to biomedical data. It also found that researchers who withhold data gain a【55】for this, and have more difficulty in【56】data from others.
The study was【57】by a research team led by sociologist Eric Campbell. The team surveyed 2,366【58】selected scientists at 117 US medical schools. Overall, 12.5 percent said that they had been denied【59】to other academic investigators' data,【60】article reprints, during the past three years. This【61】with findings by the team and other groups. But by examining the【62】of data withholding, the team identified those experiencing the most【63】. For junior staff【64】, the team found that 13.5 percent were denied access,【65】5.1 percent of senior re searchers.
The【66】between data withholding and researchers' publishing【67】during the【68】three years was【69】: 7.7 percent of those who had published 1 - 5 articles had had data with held from them, but this rose to 28.9 percent for researchers who had published more than 20. Campbell warns, "Selectively holding back on information from the most【70】researchers could slow down progress in research into the causes and cares of human disease."
(51)
A．suggest
B．provoke
C．propose
D．claim
A.A. Thank you for helping me last week.-__________.
B.B. Please don' t trouble me again.
C.C. Thank you again.
D.D. Please don't mention it
根据下面材料，回答第 31～35 题：
In 2010. a federal judge shook America's biotech industry to its core. Companies had won patents for isolated DNA for decades-by 2005 some 20% of human genes were parented. But in March 2010 a judge ruled that genes were unpatentable. Executives were violently agitated. The Biotechnology Industry Organisation (BIO), a trade group, assured members that this was just a “preliminary step” in a longer battle.
On July 29th they were relieved, at least temporarily. A federal appeals court overturned the prior decision, ruling that Myriad Genetics could indeed hold patents to two genes that help forecast a woman's risk of breast cancer. The chief executive of Myriad, a company in Utah, said the ruling was a blessing to firms and patients alike.
But as companies continue their attempts at personalised medicine, the courts will remain rather busy. The Myriad case itself is probably not over. Critics make three main arguments against gene patents: a gene is a product of nature, so it may not be patented; gene patents suppress innovation rather than reward it; and patents' monopolies restrict access to genetic tests such as Myriad's. A growing number seem to agree. Last year a federal task-force urged reform. for patents related to genetic tests. In October the Department of Justice filed a brief in the Myriad case, arguing that an isolated DNA molecule “is no less a product of nature... than are cotton fibres that have been separated from cotton seeds.”
Despite the appeals court's decision, big questions remain unanswered. For example, it is unclear whether the sequencing of a whole genome violates the patents of individual genes within it. The case may yet reach the Supreme Court.
AS the industry advances, however, other suits may have an even greater impact. Companies are unlikely to file many more patents for human DNA molecules - most are already patented or in the public domain .firms are now studying how genes interact, looking for correlations that might be used to determine the causes of disease or predict a drug’s efficacy. Companies are eager to win patents for ‘connecting the dots’, explains Hans Sauer, a lawyer for the BIO.
Their success may be determined by a suit related to this issue, brought by the Mayo Clinic, which the Supreme Court will hear in its next term. The BIO recently held a convention which included sessions to coach lawyers on the shifting landscape for patents. Each meeting was packed.
第 31 题 It can be learned from paragraph I that the biotech companies would like______
A．their executives to be active
B．judges to rule out gene patenting
C．genes to be patentable
D．the BIO to issue a warning
In 1998 America introduced so-called "business-method" patents, granting for the first time patent monopolies simply for new ways of doing business, many of which were not so new. This was a mistake. It not only ushered in a wave of new applications, but it is probably inhibiting, rather than encouraging, commercial innovation, which had never received, or needed, legal protection in the past. Europe has not, so far, made the same blunder, but the European Parliament is considering the easing of rules for innovations incorporated in software. This might have a similarly deleterious effect as business-method patents, because many of these have been simply the application of computers to long-established practices. In Japan, firms are winning large numbers of patents with extremely narrow claims, mostly to obfuscate what is new and so to ward off rivals. As more innovation happens in China and India, these problems are likely to spread there as well.
There is an urgent need for patent offices to return to first principles. A patent is a government-granted temporary monopoly (patents in most countries are given about 20 years' protection) intended to reward innovators in exchange for a disclosure by the patent holder of how his invention works, thereby encouraging others to further innovation. The qualifying tests for patents are straightforward--that an idea be useful, novel and not obvious. Unfortunately most patent offices, swamped by applications that can run to thousands of pages and confronted by companies wielding teams of lawyers, are no longer applying these tests strictly or reliably. For example, in America, many experts believe that dubious patents abound, such as the notorious one for a "sealed crustless sandwich". Of the few patents that are re-examined by the Patent and Trademark Office itself, often after complaints from others, most are invalidated or their claims clipped down. The number of duplicate claims among patents is far too high. What happens in America matters globally, since it is the world's leading patent office, approving about 170,000 patents each year, half of which are granted to foreign applicants.
Europe's patent system is also in a mess in another regard: the quilt of national patent offices and languages means that the cost of obtaining a patent for the entire European Union is too high, a burden in particular on smaller firms and individual inventors. The European Patent Office may award a patent, but the patent holder must then file certified translations at national patent offices to receive protection. Negotiations to simplify this have gone on for over a decade without success.
As a start, patent applications should be made public. In most countries they are, but in America this is the case only under certain circumstances, and after 18 months. More openness would encourage rivals to offer the overworked patent office evidence with which to judge whether an application is truly novel
A．Patent offices have been too lax in granting patents.
B．Most patent offices are swamped by applications.
C．It is probably inhibiting, rather than encouraging, commercial innovation.
D．The quilt of national patent offices and languages
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, 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 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.
Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of ______.
A．their limited value to businesses.
B．their connection with asset allocation.
C．the possible restriction on their granting.
D．the controversy over their authorization.
Patents
Human beings are competitive creatures. The evolutionary drive towards survival of the fittest has made us that way, and contemporary man has carried the competitive urge to its highest form. We see it in all aspects of human activity, from the conflicts of two-year olds over possession of a toy through all the physical and intellectual competitions of school years to the ultimate struggles between races and nations for power and possessions. We learned early, however, that the forces of competition must be balanced with an equal measure of cooperation if all of us are not to be destroyed by the process. Organized society resulted, and successful societies have been those that have achieved the most effective balance of competition and cooperation.
Patent systems are among the most straightforward examples of such a successful, cooperative arrangement and show society operating at its best. Patent systems reward the competitive, creative drive with a temporary, limited, exclusive right, in return for the cooperation of an inventor in teaching the rest of society how to use his or her findings for all time thereafter. This philosophy must be kept in mind if one is to use and to understand patents effectively.
Early Patent Systems
Patent systems more or less as we know have been used as a social tool since the Renaissance. Rulers of the Italian city states recognized that their creative subjects needed encouragement and protection a gainst copying by their competitive fellows. Patents were granted for various terms, the most famous being a 20-year patent granted to Galileo on a mechanism for raising irrigation water to fields. European and English monarchs granted patents to encourage commerce and, unfortunately, to reward favorites of the court.
The US Patent System
The American colonies made a practice of granting patents to their inventors, and the United States Constitution provided the basis for our patent and copyright laws in Article 1, section 8:
The Congress shall have the power.., to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.
This constitutional directive was given life by the Patent Act of 1790. The first US patent, signed by George Washington ,Randolph, and Jefferson, was in fact on a chemical subject. The inventor was Samuel Hopkins of Philadelphia, and his contribution to society was an improved method of making potash from wood ashes for use in soap making.
The distinguished committee made a diligent effort to meet their duty to examine all applications for patentable merit, but within three years it became clear that they simply could not give adequate study to every application being claimed. In 1793 a "registration" system was adopted by the United States, meaning that patents were issued on every application that met formal requirements and that the burden of sorting out priority of rights among those holding conflicting patents was thrown into the courts.
Perhaps it is a blessing that all the record from this period of disorders were destroyed by a fire in the Patent Office in 1836. The Congress then passed the Patent Act of 1836, which created the Commissioner of patents and a Patent Office to examine applications to determine whether a truly new invention had been made. Present US patents are numbered from the adoption of this law, and the series reached No. 4 000 000 on December 28,1976.
In 1887 the United States joined with many other countries in the Paris Convention. The present pa tent law of the United States is the Patent Act of 1952, the most important new feature being a workable definition of what constitutes invention. A movement to rewrite US patent law is in progress at this writing.
N
A．Y
B．N
C．NG
警告：系统检测到您的账号存在安全风险
为了保护您的账号安全，请在“简答题”公众号进行验证，点击“官网服务”-“账号验证”后输入验证码“”完成验证，验证成功后方可继续查看答案！
