Solution
We need to find what would make Dr. Watrall's complaints seem wrong or unfair. Let us trace his main concerns first.
From passage: "Watrall says this project is just a way for Google to promote Google... But at its core, it's all about advertisements and driving traffic. Watrall says these images belong on the site of a museum or educational institution, where there is serious scholarship and a very different mission."
Dr. Watrall has two main complaints: (1) Google just wants to promote itself with ads and (2) these precious images should be on museum websites, not Google's site.
To invalidate his objections ->we need something that directly fixes his biggest concern. His strongest point is that images belong on museum sites, not Google's commercial platform.
Let's check each option to see which one makes his complaint seem unfair:
š“ Option 1 -> irrelevant -> Copyright ownership doesn't address where the images are displayed or Google's promotional motives
š¢ Option 2 -> directly invalidates -> If CyArk puts images on museum websites, then Watrall's main complaint (images should be on museum sites) becomes pointless
š Option 3 -> partial-truth -> Removing ads only fixes the "advertisement" part but ignores his bigger concern about museum placement
š“ Option 4 -> irrelevant -> Banning CyArk doesn't prove Watrall wrong, it just stops the whole project
Key insight: Watrall's strongest argument is "these images belong on museum sites". If Option 2 happens, his whole argument falls apart because the images would be on museum sites.
More from this set:
Question 11