銆€銆€2010鑰冪爺闁辫畝text2-text3椤屾簮鍒嗘瀽鍙婂弮鑰冪瓟妗�

銆€銆€鍖椾含鏂版澅鏂瑰(xu茅)鏍�  鍛ㄩ浄

銆€銆€Text 2

銆€銆€A Pending Threat to Patents

銆€銆€by Michael Orey

銆€銆€Business Week  February 21, 2008

銆€銆€Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com (AMZN) received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch (MER) got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box銆�

銆€銆€Now the nation's top patent court appears poised to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago (绗簩鍗佸叚椤� D绛旀灏�(du矛) the controversy over authorization). In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 15 said it would use a case pending before it 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, a patent professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents. (绗簩鍗佷竷椤� D绛旀灏�(du矛) it may change the legal practice in US)"

銆€銆€Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face (绗簩鍗佸叓椤� C绛旀灏�(du矛)锛宑hange of the attitude锛屽洜?y脿n)妤圭瀣瞗(shu艒)鑱�(li谩n)閭﹀贰鍥炴硶搴互鍓嶆槸寰堟敮鎸佸晢妤�(y猫)妯″紡涓婄殑灏�(zhu膩n)鍒╃殑锛屼絾鏄従(xi脿n)鍦ㄥ彲鑳藉畬鍏ㄤ笉鏀寔浜�)锛� because it was the Federal Circuit itself that ushered in such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank (STT) case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by nascent 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 portfolios, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM (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銆�

銆€銆€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 uate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling銆�

銆€銆€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. (绗簩鍗佷節椤孊绛旀灏�(du矛)are often unnecessarily issued?锛孎(xi脿n)鍦ㄧ編鍦�(gu贸)鏈€楂樻硶闄㈠凡缍�(j墨ng)鏀剁穵浜嗛爳鐧�(f膩)灏�(zhu膩n)鍒╃殑鑼冨湇锛岄偅涔堣伅(li谩n)閭﹀贰鍥炴硶搴篃鏈�(hu矛)鏀剁穵灏�(du矛)鍟嗘キ(y猫)妯″紡鐨勫皥(zhu膩n)鍒╃殑瀵╂牳)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銆�

銆€銆€绺辫鍏ㄦ枃锛屾渶鍚庝竴鍊�(g猫)椤岀洰绗笁鍗侀锛屼綔鐐轰富鏃ㄩ锛岀瓟妗堟噳(y墨ng)瑭叉槸 A looming threat to business-method patents

銆€銆€26. Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of

銆€銆€[A] their limited value to business

銆€銆€[B] their connection with asset allocation

銆€銆€[C] the possible restriction on their granting

銆€銆€[D] the controversy over authorization

銆€銆€27. Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?

銆€銆€[A] Its ruling complies with the court decisions

銆€銆€[B] It involves a very big business transaction

銆€銆€[C] It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit

銆€銆€[D] It may change the legal practices in the U.S銆�

銆€銆€28. The word 鈥渁bout-face鈥� (Line 1, Para 3) most probably means

銆€銆€[A] loss of good will

銆€銆€[B] increase of hostility

銆€銆€[C] change of attitude

銆€銆€[D] enhancement of density

銆€銆€29. We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patents

銆€銆€[A] are immune to legal challenges

銆€銆€[B] are often unnecessarily issued

銆€銆€[C] lower the esteem for patent holders

銆€銆€[D] increase the incidence of risks

銆€銆€30. Which of the following would be the subject of the text?

銆€銆€[A] A looming threat to business-method patents

銆€銆€[B] Protection for business-method patent holders

銆€銆€[C] A legal case regarding business-method patents

銆€銆€[D] A prevailing trend against business-method patents

銆€銆€Text 2 鍙冭€冪瓟妗� 26-30椤� DDCBA

銆€銆€Text 3

銆€銆€The Accidental Influentials

銆€銆€Harvard Business Review  2007 02

銆€銆€In his best-selling book The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell argues that 鈥渟ocial epidemics鈥� are driven in large part by the actions of a tiny minority of special individuals, often called influentials, who are unusually informed, persuasive, or well connected. The idea is intuitively compelling 鈥� we think we see it happening all the time 鈥� but it doesn鈥檛 explain how ideas actually spread銆�

銆€銆€The supposed importance of influentials derives from a plausible-sounding but largely untested theory called the 鈥渢wo-step flow of communication鈥濓細 Information flows from the media to the influentials and from them to everyone else. Marketers have embraced the two-step flow because it suggests that if they can just find and influence the influentials, those select people will do most of the work for them. The theory also seems to explain the sudden and unexpected popularity of certain looks, brands, or neighborhoods. In many such cases, a cursory search for causes finds that some small group 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 can drive trends銆�

銆€銆€In recent work, however, my colleague Peter Dodds and I have found that influentials have far less impact on social epidemics than is generally supposed. In fact, they don鈥檛 seem to be required at all銆�

銆€銆€Our argument stems from a simple observation about social influence: With the exception of celebrities like Oprah Winfrey 鈥� whose outsize presence is primarily a function of media, not interpersonal, influence 鈥� even the most influential members of a population simply don鈥檛 interact with that many others. Yet it is precisely these noncelebrity influentials who, according to 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 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, the cascade of change won鈥檛 propagate very far or affect many people銆�

銆€銆€Building on this basic truth about interpersonal influence, Dodds and I studied the dynamics of social contagion by conducting thousands of computer simulations of populations, manipulating a number of variables relating to people鈥檚 ability to influence others and their tendency to be influenced. Our work shows that the principal requirement for what we call 鈥済lobal cascades鈥濃€� the widespread propagation of influence through networks 鈥� is the presence not of a few influentials but, rather, of a critical mass of easily influenced people, each of whom adopts, say, a look or a brand after being exposed to a single adopting neighbor. Regardless of how influential an individual is locally, he or she can exert global influence only if this critical mass is available to propagate a chain reaction銆�

銆€銆€31.By citing the book The Tipping Point, the author intends to

銆€銆€[A]analyze the consequences of social epidemics

銆€銆€[B]discuss influentials鈥� function in spreading ideas

銆€銆€[C]exemplify people鈥檚 intuitive response to social epidemics

銆€銆€[D]describe the essential characteristics of influentials銆�

銆€銆€32.The author suggests that the 鈥渢wo-step-flow theory鈥�

銆€銆€[A]serves as a solution to marketing problems

銆€銆€[B]has helped explain certain prent trends

銆€銆€[C]has won support from influentials

銆€銆€[D]requires solid evidence for its validity

銆€銆€33.what the researchers have observed recently shows that

銆€銆€[A] the power of  influential goes with social interactions

銆€銆€[B] interpersonal links can be enhanced through the media

銆€銆€[C] influentials have more channels to reach the public

銆€銆€[D] most celebrities enjoy wide media attention

銆€銆€34.The underlined phrase 鈥渢hese people鈥漣n paragraph 4 refers to the ones who

銆€銆€[A] stay outside the network of social influence

銆€銆€[B] have little contact with the source of influence

銆€銆€[C] are influenced and then influence others

銆€銆€[D] are influenced by the initial influential

銆€銆€35.what is the essential element in the dynamics of social influence?

銆€銆€[A]The eagerness to be accepted

銆€銆€[B]The impulse to influence others

銆€銆€[C]The readiness to be influenced

銆€銆€[D]The inclination to rely on others

銆€銆€Text 3 鍙冭€冪瓟妗� 31-35椤� BDACC

銆€銆€text 4

銆€銆€Banks and mark-to-market accounting

銆€銆€The Economist

銆€銆€April 8th, 2009

銆€銆€36. Bankers complained that they were forced to

銆€銆€[A] follow unfavorable asset uation rules

銆€銆€[B]collect payments from third parties

銆€銆€[C]cooperate with the price managers

銆€銆€[D]reuate some of their assets銆�

銆€銆€37.According to the author , the rule changes of the FASB may result in

銆€銆€[A]the diminishing role of management

銆€銆€[B]the revival of the banking system

銆€銆€[C]the banks鈥檒ong-term asset losses

銆€銆€[D]the weakening of its independence

銆€銆€38.According to Paragraph 4, McCreevy objects to the IASB鈥檚 attempt to

銆€銆€[A]keep away from political influences銆�

銆€銆€[B]evade the pressure from their peers銆�

銆€銆€[C]act on their own in rule-setting銆�

銆€銆€[D]take gradual measures in reform銆�

銆€銆€39.The author thinks the banks were 鈥渙n the wrong planet 鈥漣n that they

銆€銆€[A]misinterpreted market price indicators

銆€銆€[B]exaggerated the real value of their assets

銆€銆€[C]neglected the likely existence of bad debts銆�

銆€銆€[D]denied booking losses in their sale of assets銆�

銆€銆€40.The author鈥檚 attitude towards standard-setters is one of

銆€銆€[A]satisfaction銆�

銆€銆€[B]skepticism銆�

銆€銆€[C]objectiveness

銆€銆€[D]sympathy

銆€銆€Text 4 鍙冭€冪瓟妗�36-40椤� ADCBD