试题库在线考试题库-历年真题模拟试题及答案-考博英语在线试题测试中心-希赛网

华东政法大学

Ⅳ. Michael Brown’s 2014 death in Ferguson, Missouri thrust police-officer involved homicides into the popular consciousness. A series of subsequent officer-involved homicides has kept the issue politically and legally salient. Despite this, official data sources are thin and unreliable. As in other large cities, shooting victims are overwhelmingly minorities, with Black persons constituting over 80% of victims. Contrary to intuition, many of the officer shooters are minorities as well. The analysis here suggests that neither racist malevolence nor unconscious bias afford complete explanations for why officer-involved shootings occur. Both of these explanatory frameworks focus too intensively upon individual officers’ decision-making at the expense of institutional and situational dynamics. Scholars and policy makers should focus far more intensively on regulating bad practices, rather than just on disciplining bad officers following egregious incidents. Shifting focus in this way will help identify connections between everyday policing tactics in minority neighborhoods — such as plainclothes policing and aggressive stop and frisk — and officer involved shootings. The article also concludes that evidentiary challenges mar post hoc review of officer-involved shootings, whether it is in the form of judicial or civilian review. This also underscores the importance of preventive regulation.There is no quantitative benchmark that allows one to neatly and objectively problematize (or rationalize) the high numbers of Black and Hispanic officer-involved shooting victims. Claiming disproportionality requires significant normative judgments. The racial profile of officer involved shooting victims in the IPRA Reports is dramatically disproportionate to that of Chicago residents. Comparable if not quite so dramatic racial disproportionality holds for other municipalities and the United States as a whole. But the IPRA Reports suggest that the majority of shooting victims were armed when shot. This should lead one to ask whether the city’s overall demographic profile is the proper benchmark for measuring whether shootings are inordinately visited upon Black and Hispanic men. Related is the question of what reference point should be used to assess how many shootings are too many? These two questions will be familiar to anyone who studies antidiscrimination law — establishing the fact of racial disparity requires an appropriate comparison group. For example, a plaintiff suing a medical employer for racial discrimination in hiring of doctors could not point to the employers’ having hired fewer minorities than their share of the general population.1.The underlined word “salient” is closest in meaning with ___ in the sentence.2.What could be the intuition referred to by the author?3.According to the first paragraph, the author thinks that ___.4.In the last sentence, the author gives an example of medical employment to illustrate that ___.

Ⅲ. The Copyright Act of 1976 is the governing federal copyright law in the United States. Pursuant to section 102，copyright protection subsists upon satisfaction of three conditions: first, a work must be an “original work of authorship”; second, the work must be “fixed in any tangible medium of expression”; and third, the work must come within the subject matter of copyright. Sports telecasts are original works of authorship. To be original, a work must be independently created (as opposed to copied from other works) and possess at least “some minimal degree of creativity”. It is obvious that live sports telecasts are independent creations, rather than reproductions of earlier works. The creativity element is just as easily satisfied. Courts long have recognized that photographing and filming involves creative endeavors. In the context of filming sports, the decisions “concerning camera angles, types of shots, the use of instant replays and split screens, and shot selection similarly supply the creativity required for the copyright ability of the telecasts”. Sports telecasts are fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Additionally, it is of no consequence that these live sports telecasts are fixed simultaneous with its transmission. Section 101 expressly provides that “a work consisting of sounds, images, or both, that are being transmitted, is ‘fixed’…if a fixation of the work is being made simultaneously with its transmission”. Since the telecasts of the games are videotaped at the same time that they are disseminated, the telecasts are fixed in tangible form.Sports telecasts are within the subject matter of copyright as an “audiovisual work”. The Copyright Act notes several types of subject matter that is copyrightable, of which “audiovisual works” is one of the categories. To be satisfied as an audiovisual work, the work in question must consist of a series of related images shown by the use of machines or devices with accompanying sounds. From this definition, there is no doubt that sports telecasts are within the subject matter of copyright. Since it is clearly established that sports telecasts, even those transmitted on a live basis, are copyrighted works, the next issue is ownership of the copyright.This issue was first addressed in Pittsburgh Athletic Co. v. KQV Broadcasting Co., albeit a decision under the old copyright regime. In a suit for an injunction against KQV Broadcasting for interfering with General Mills’ exclusive contract to broadcast Pirates games over the radio, the court ruled that the baseball team had a property right to control the news of games by broadcasting.1.Sports telecasts are original works of authorship because ___.2.Sports telecasts are fixed in tangible form NOT because ___.3.Which of the following is NOT correct according to the paragraphs?4.The most suitable title for these paragraphs is ___.

II. Last Term, the Supreme Court in United States v. Halper, unanimously created a rule of law that will disrupt federal, state, and local governments’ ability to enforce a vast array of important regulatory schemes, including environmental protection, securities regulation, and tax collection. This likely disruption flows from the Court’s recognition that certain constitutional protections, previously thought only available to criminal defendants, are at times equally accessible to civil defendants from whom government is attempting to collect civil penalties for proscribed activity. While the Court’s decision in Halper focused only on the extension of the double jeopardy clause to civil penalty proceedings, its reasoning and holding are sufficiently broad to allow the application of other constitutional protections to government-initiated civil penalty cases. These additional constitutional protections could include theeighth amendment, the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment.Turning initially to the more narrow double jeopardy issue addressed in Halper, the Court’s application of double jeopardy protection to a civil penalty proceeding was a remarkable change in the law. By extending the reach of the double jeopardy clause, Justice Blackmun’s opinion ignored a consistent line of cases recognizing double jeopardy protection only in the context of a criminal proceeding. Looking at Halper from a more panoramic angle, however, it is the Court’s reasoning, apart from its holding on double jeopardy that forms the core of the disruption created for government regulatory programs.For example, in the process of justifying its ruling, the Court found it necessary: (1)to blur the line between civil and criminal punishment and to define punishment for constitutional purposes to include civil penalties; (2) to discard a statutory construction test used for over fifty years in deciding whether a legislature intended a criminal or civil penalty; (3) to reject the concept of deterrence as a legitimate objective of a civil statute; (4) to reduce the concept of government damage to a monetary formula while ignoring substantial precedent which recognized the possibility of nonmeasurable harm to government; (5) to create an accounting procedure for deciding when the line is crossed between remedy and punishment for constitutional purposes; and (6) to allow individual trial courts to replace the will of legislatures in deciding the rational level of indemnity to government for its loss.1.The new rule created by the Court in Halper case will disrupt different levels of governments’ ability to ___.2.According to Halper, which of the following is NOT true?3.What is the remarkable change in the law according to the second paragraph?4.Reading the paragraphs given, one can feel that author ___the Halper case.

I. The psychological exploration into litigants’ procedural preferences dates back to the early 1970s, when empirical research by Thibaut and Walker — largely regarded as the originators of the procedural justice paradigm — and their colleagues revealed that laypeople care about their direct and indirect control over legal decisions that affect them. They demonstrated that when laypeople evaluate procedures, they generally assess how the procedures distribute control between the parties themselves and third parties (e.g., mediators, arbitrators, judges). Their research also suggests that disputants prefer procedures that allow them (as opposed to third parties) to control the process. Their early work highlights the important role that “voice” (i.e., the opportunity to share one’s story or side of the dispute) plays in how disputants construe dispute resolution options, which in turn illuminates the critical role that subjective perceptions play in the functioning of the legal system. Subsequent research produced additional theories that explain why disputants care about process. One theory — the “instrumental” or “social exchange” theory — suggests that people desire process control because they believe it provides an indirect way to control their dispute’s outcome. Another framework — the “group value” model — suggests that people care about process because the quality of the process they experience helps them to assess their status and inclusion within their group or community. Other research emphasized how process has important implications for how people perceive social justice — when the fairness of an outcome is ambiguous, people often use their evaluations of the process they experienced as a mental shortcut for assessing the outcome.In practice, legal organizations and scholars often use the concept of control to classify legal procedures. Mediation and negotiation are commonly conceptualized as offering litigants greater process and outcome control as compared to adjudicatory options such as trial and arbitration. The American Bar Association, for example, describes mediation and negotiation as offering parties greater participation in reaching a resolution, as well as control over the outcome. Similarly, scholars often conceptualize legal procedures on a spectrum. On one end of the scale, negotiation offers participants control over both the process and outcome and does not involve a third-party neutral. On the other end, arbitration and trial empower third-party neutrals to determine the outcome of a dispute and impose formality on the process. Mediation, existing in the middle of the spectrum, utilizes a third-party neutral, but allows parties to shape the process and control the outcome.1.Thibaut and Walker are regarded as ___.2.Thibaut and Walker found in their research that laypeople ___.3.According to the first paragraph, which of the statements is wrong?4.What is the most suitable topic of the second paragraph?

Title:How does online shopping influence our daily life?NOTES: Marks will be awarded for content, organization, grammar and appropriateness. Failure to follow the instruction may result in a loss of marks.

2 / 71