Correct Answer: whether firms must pay before training systems on creative work
Passage Reference: whether companies must pay before they train their systems on books, photos and articles
Why this is correct: The blogger joins the debate when a Commons committee starts asking a question. Must companies pay before they train their systems on books, photos and articles? Every view in the post answers that question.
Tips: For a “mainly about” question, find the question the committee is asking in the first paragraph. Then check that every speaker answers it.
Why the other options are wrong:
- how translators can find their work in leaked files: The leaked list is only how the blogger became involved. The blog post does not explain how to search such files.
- whether start-ups should move their research abroad: Kearney warns that strict rules could freeze small Canadian firms, but nobody proposes moving research abroad.
- how publishers write contracts for translated books: Noonan’s contract clause is one detail. The blog post is about the rules for training, not about writing contracts.
Correct Answer: Mehmet Kearney
Passage Reference: training resembles reading at enormous scale more than it resembles printing copies
Why this is correct: Mehmet Kearney answers that training resembles reading at enormous scale more than it resembles printing copies.
Tips: The question uses different words from the passage. Read each speaker’s lines and ask who says what training is like.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Aoife Mathers: Aoife Mathers mentions studying only to reject it. She says a system that sells drafts in an author’s voice is competing with its source, not studying it.
- Daphne Imrie: Daphne Imrie sorts training by whether it earns money. She never compares training with reading or copying.
- Emrys Noonan: Emrys Noonan wants firms to disclose the works they have used, but he does not describe what training is like.
Correct Answer: sales lost to drafts written in an author’s voice
Passage Reference: A system that absorbs an author’s voice and then sells drafts in that voice, she added, is competing with its source
Why this is correct: Mathers argues that a system selling drafts in an author’s voice competes with its source. So proof of sales lost to such drafts would support her.
Tips: Find the reason Mathers gives the committee in the second paragraph. Then pick the evidence that would make that reason stronger.
Why the other options are wrong:
- evidence that most models store no whole chapters: This fact appears in the blog post, but it is Kearney’s point against strict licensing, so it works against Mathers.
- research labs that train without earning money: Unpaid research is the tier that Imrie would leave largely free of permission. It does not show that authors are harmed.
- contracts that only cover books signed from now on: This describes the weakness Noonan admits in his own clause. It says nothing about Mathers’s claim that training competes with authors.
Correct Answer: the firm would pay a rate set by a collective society
Passage Reference: training for profit would be covered by a compulsory licence, with rates fixed by a collective society rather than haggled deal by deal
Why this is correct: Under Imrie’s tiers, training for profit falls under a compulsory licence. The rates are fixed by a collective society rather than haggled deal by deal.
Tips: Imrie treats two kinds of training differently. Read the part of her sentence about training for profit, after “while”.
Why the other options are wrong:
- the firm would bargain with each author for a price: Imrie wants rates fixed by a collective society precisely so that prices are not haggled deal by deal.
- the firm would owe nothing if it logged its sources: Logging sources is something Kearney would accept. In Imrie’s plan a firm that trains for profit still pays.
- the firm would need written consent from every creator: Imrie’s licence is compulsory, so firms do not need consent. Creators who object must add their names to a registry instead.
Correct Answer: favourable, but worried about work already copied
Passage Reference: What worries me is Noonan’s point.
Why this is correct: The blogger says Imrie’s tiers appeal to them more than either all-or-nothing position. But the blogger adds, “What worries me is Noonan’s point.” A new rate does nothing for a novel already copied.
Tips: Read the last paragraph closely. Check each choice against every sentence there, not only the first one.
Why the other options are wrong:
- enthusiastic, since the tiers settle every concern: The writer likes the tiers but says they do nothing for work copied in the past unless the law looks backwards.
- doubtful, since the tiers favour start-ups too much: Notice that the writer praises the tiers for sparing start-ups thousands of tiny contracts. Helping start-ups is not the objection.
- opposed, since writers would lose all control: In the last sentence, the writer asks an MP for Imrie’s model, so the writer is not opposed to it.
Correct Answer: ignores a site’s refusal
Passage Reference: with damages when a scraper ignores a site’s refusal
Why this is correct: Mathers wants firms to hold licences before training, with damages when a scraper ignores a site’s refusal.
Tips: The comment calls her the writers’ group lawyer, so go back to her lines. Look for when she wants damages paid.
Why the other options are wrong:
- stores whole chapters of a book: Whole chapters come up in Kearney’s point that most models keep none. Mathers ties damages to ignored refusals.
- trains a system outside Canada: Mathers never mentions where training happens. Foreign firms appear only in Kearney’s warning.
- earns money from a free book: Free books are never discussed. The trigger for damages is a scraper that ignores a refusal.
Correct Answer: add their names to a public registry
Passage Reference: Creators who want no part of it, even for a fee, could add their names to a public registry.
Why this is correct: In Imrie’s plan, creators who want no part of it, even for a fee, could add their names to a public registry.
Tips: The comment calls her the professor, so find the person who teaches copyright law. Read what creators who want no part of it could do.
Why the other options are wrong:
- demand twice the usual fee: Imrie’s plan has rates fixed by a collective society. Creators who want out refuse payment altogether rather than asking for more.
- sue any firm without hiring a lawyer: Lawsuits are never part of Imrie’s tiers. Damages appear only in Mathers’s proposal.
- ask Parliament for an exemption: Creators do not need Parliament for anything in Imrie’s plan. They simply join the registry.
Correct Answer: does nothing for work copied earlier
Passage Reference: he admits the clause protects nothing that was copied before it existed
Why this is correct: Noonan admits that his training clause protects nothing that was copied before it existed.
Tips: Look for the word “admits” in the Halifax publisher’s lines. It shows the weak point of his own clause.
Why the other options are wrong:
- has already been tested in court: The writer says no court in Canada has settled the question, and Noonan never mentions a court test.
- covers only books in translation: Noonan adds the clause to every new contract, not only to translations.
- came from the writers’ group lawyers: Noonan says he added the clause himself. Mathers and her writers’ group are never linked to it.
Correct Answer: your French translation of a Chilean novel
Passage Reference: The file was my French translation of a Chilean novel
Why this is correct: In the first paragraph, the file on the leaked list is the writer’s French translation of a Chilean novel.
Tips: The comment asks what the writer found on the list. Read the second sentence of the post carefully, and check the languages and countries.
Why the other options are wrong:
- your Spanish translation of a French novel: The languages are reversed. The blogger translated a Chilean novel into French.
- your first book of poems about Quebec City: Quebec City is where the blogger worked at the kitchen table, not the subject of a book of poems.
- your English novel set in Santiago: Santiago is never mentioned, and the novel was not written in English by the blogger. The blogger translated it.
Correct Answer: no Canadian court has settled the question
Passage Reference: No court in Canada has settled the question
Why this is correct: The blogger writes that no court in Canada has settled the question yet.
Tips: The comment gives a reason for writing to an MP. Look at the last sentence of the first paragraph.
Why the other options are wrong:
- the committee has already voted on it: The Commons committee is still asking questions. No vote is reported.
- the courts have ruled for the start-ups: No court has ruled for either side. The question is still open.
- Parliament has already passed a new law: The blog post describes a committee that is still asking questions, so no law has been passed yet.
