Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[sejpdw]

1. In the following passage, underlined part is gramatically right?
I think "there is no copyright" seems to be the right expression.

2. Which is gramatically right as an explanation about the following passage?
(A) "Live performances" were not used as an example of intellectual property rifhts.

(B) "Live performances" was not used as an example of intellectual property rifhts.


"To take away intellectual property rights is to deny creators the right to profit from their labors. This myth is based on the idea that the only way to make money is to �sell" one�s ideas. In fact, this is not true. Consulting, offering support services, performing ― these are all ways in which creators can make money without appealing to the notion of intellectual property rights. Even if [u]there were no copyright[/u], a band could still make money from live performances, for instance. Removing intellectual property rights would not deny creators the right to profit from their labors; it would, however, allow all of society to share in the benefits of their work."

[bud]

1. It's correct, although your version would also be correct. Using "were" is the subjuntive mood (I think) - supposing what might be instead of saying what is. Using "is" is saying what happens in a case that is true. Either works OK in this example.

2. Use "were" for "performances" - third person plural.