《2012考研英语阅读材料.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《2012考研英语阅读材料.doc（20页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、 Over the past decade, thousands of patents have seen granted for what are called business methods.Amazon com 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 lying a box。Now the nations top
2、 patent court appears completely ready to scale hack 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
3、 to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known, is “a very big deal”， says DermisD, 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-fa
4、ce because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 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 comp
5、anies trying to stake out exclusive pints to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might bent them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued m
6、ore than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice。The Bilski case involves a c
7、laimed 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 courts judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should “reconsider” its state
8、street Bank ruling。The Federal Circuits 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 obviou
9、s. The judges on the Federal circuit are “reaction to the anti-patent trend at the supreme court” says Harole C Wegner, a par tend attorney and professor at Washington University Law School。Text 3In his book The Tipping Point Malcolm Aladuell argues that social epidemics are driven in large part by
10、the acting of a tiny minority of special individuals, often called influentials who are unusual informed, persuasive, or we connect. The idea is intuitively compelling but it doesnt explain how ideas actually spread。The supposed importance of influentials derives from a plausible sounding but largel
11、y untested theory called the tow-step flow of communication. Information flows from the media to the influentials and from them to everyone else. Marketers have embraced the two-step flow became it suggests that if they can just find and influence the influentials, those select people will do most o
12、f the work for them. The theory also seems to explain the sudden and unexpected popularity of people was wearing, promoting or developing whatever it is before anyone else paid attention. Anecdotal evidence of this kind fits nicely with the idea that only certain special people call drive trends。In
13、their recent work, however, some researchers have come up with the finding that influentials have far less impact on social epidemics than is generally supposed. In fact , they dont seem to be required of all. The researchers argument stems from a simple observation about social influence, with the
14、exception of a few celebrities like Oprah Winfrey-whose outsize presence is primarily a function of media, not interpersonal influence-even the most influential members of a population simply dont interact with that many others. Yet it is precisely these non-celebrating influentials who according to
15、 the two-step-flow theory are supposed to drive social epidemics by influencing their friends and colleagues directly. For a social epidemic to occur however each person so affected must then influence his or her own acquaintances, who must in turn influence theirs and so on and just how many others
16、 pay attention to each of these people has little to do with the initial influential. If people in the network just two degrees removed from the initial influential prove resistant, for example from the initial influential, prove resistant, for example the cascade of change wont propagate very far or affect many people。Building on the basic truth about interpersonal influence, the researchers studied the dynamics of populations manipulating a number of variables
