By examining Watrall's perspectives, it becomes evident that he opposes Google's intentions rather than being against the technology itself. This allows us to eliminate option 2. Additionally, Watrall is not dismissive of laypeople's access to those images; in fact, being dismissive would place him in the wrong.
Now, we have options 3 and 4 to consider. Is Watrall uneasy or outrightly critical? Possibly both. However, Google has not explicitly stated that it will use the images for commercial purposes. Google has emphasized providing free access to the images, and any potential commercial benefits are speculative at this point. Option 4 appears to be the most fitting choice.
We should aim to respond to questions by finding information within the passage. The term 'digital colonization' is introduced in the initial paragraph, where critics inquire about "who should own the copyrights." It is referred to as 'digital colonization.' Therefore, digital colonization indicates that the countries where the scanned sites are situated do not possess the scan copyrights.
Option 4 is another plausible choice, but it would be accurate only if the host countries have ownership of the copyrights. They can grant copyright permission only if they actually own the copyrights.
To accurately address this question, it's crucial to examine Dr. Watrall's argument. In the passage, it is mentioned that "Watrall says these images belong on the site of a museum or educational institution, where there is serious scholarship and a very different mission."
If Option 1 is accurate, it would undeniably contradict Dr. Watrall's objection.
Acquiring copyright technically involves possessing something. In this context, even though the site is situated in one country, the copyrights are held by a different entity, resembling the scenario where Western museums own Egyptian artifacts. It's crucial to note that 'seizing' implies forcefully taking something from someone.
Eliminating Option 1 is appropriate since illegal downloading does not confer ownership.
Similarly, Option 3 is not fitting because providing free access does not equate to granting ownership rights.
Option 4 is also unsuitable as it lacks the proper analogy for the situation at hand.
This question can be addressed by applying common sense and carefully considering the statements made by Google and CyArk in defense of their actions. The appropriate choice would be one that these companies would not use to justify their actions.
Options 1, 2, and 4 offer plausible reasons. However, Option 3 is not a valid reason because it implies an authoritarian attitude on the part of the companies. Someone claiming to be a "protector of culture" could be seen as snobbish, whereas being a promoter of culture is more acceptable. Therefore, Option 3 is the correct choice.
\(\text{The Politics of Change}\) | \(\text{The Change in Politics}\) | \(\text{Politics and Change:}\) A Global Perspective} |
In "The Politics of Change," political analyst Dr. Emily Harper examines the dynamics of social movements and their impact on policy reform. Through detailed case studies, she explores how grassroots organizations, protests, and advocacy campaigns shape public opinion and influence lawmakers. Dr. Harper provides insights into the strategies that successful movements employ and discusses the challenges they face in a complex political landscape. She discusses key strategies, such as coalition-building, media engagement, and the use of digital platforms to amplify voices. | This book by veteran journalist Mark Stevens investigates the shifting political landscape in the 21st century. Focusing on major elections, emerging political parties, and the role of social media, Stevens analyzes how technology and demographics are transforming political engagement and voter behaviour. Through interviews with political leaders, campaign strategists, and everyday voters, Stevens uncovers how demographic shifts and technological advancements are reshaping political discourse in urban areas. He analyzes the implications of these changes for traditional political institutions and explores how movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter have disrupted conventional narratives. | In this insightful work, international relations scholar Dr. Anika Patel presents a global analysis of political change across various regions. She explores the factors that drive political transitions, including economic shifts, cultural movements, and international influences. Dr. Patel emphasizes the interconnectedness of global politics and how local changes can have far-reaching implications. She analyzes various factors driving political transitions, including economic upheaval, cultural shifts, and the impact of globalization. She provides case studies from diverse regions, such as the Arab Spring, democratic movements in Latin America, and shifts in power in Asia. The book serves as a vital resource for understanding the complexities of political evolution in a rapidly changing world. |