扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2007E2-CR-54
The pharmaceutical industry argues that because new drugs will not be developed unless heavy development costs can be recouped in later sales, the current 20 years of protection provided by patents should be extended in the case of newly developed drugs. However, in other industries new-product development continues despite high development costs, a fact that indicates that the extension is unnecessary.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the pharmaceutical industry's argument against the challenge made above?
No industries other than the pharmaceutical industry have asked for an extension of the 20-year limit on patent protection.
Clinical trials of new drugs, which occur after the patent is granted and before the new drug can be marketed, often now take as long as 10 years to complete.
There are several industries in which the ratio of research and development costs to revenues is higher than it is in the pharmaceutical industry.
An existing patent for a drug does not legally prevent pharmaceutical companies from bringing to market alternative drugs, provided they are sufficiently dissimilar to the patented drug.
Much recent industrial innovation has occurred in products—example, in the computer and electronics industries—which patent protection is often very ineffective.
转CD：题目说制药业要求延长这个20年的patents protection，因为他们说不延长的话以后的sale弥补不了前期的大量研发cost。 但是题目接着说别的产业前期也是需要大量cost但是仍然继续研发新产品，没有要求说要延长这个20年得期限。 所以结论是制药业的这个要求是没有根据的。
那么怎么能支持制药业的说法呢，如果别的行业在20年期间能赚回足够的钱去弥补cost而制药业不能，那么制药业就有理由argue longer extension.
看B选项，在这个20年有效期的时间内，制药业需要用掉其中10年来做trials,那么也就是说相比其他产业制药业少了10年sale的时间，那么自然少赚了很多钱，就有可能弥补不了前期大量的cost，因此支持了制药业的argument。
mark~
其实还是类比
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论