Context:
Gamers Need Love Too<br>Bill's older brother told him he'd never get a date. He spent too much time playing video games. One day he was at the video game store. A pretty girl came up beside him, asking his advice on a game. They hit it off so he asked her out and she said yes.
Hypothesis: Bill had been to a video game store at some point in time. OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No
Yes
Input: OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No

I agree, and this Court has -- just talking about the judgment of the Congress the 105th Congress in 1998. This is the way the argument that somehow implicitly the initial 1790 copyright statute was saying to people, you get a copyright if you exchange whatever existing rights you have. That simply does not make any sense. There is no language, and it's a relatively late-discovered argument, because it sees its full --

Sentence: people in 1790 had to give up rights

Output: Yes
Problem:
Read the following paragraph and determine if the hypothesis is true:

The Seashell<br>Daniel liked to dig at the beach. He always found interesting shells. Last time, he found a giant shell that had pink swirls. He took hit home on put it on a shelf. People always commented hon how beautiful it was.

OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No
Hypothesis: Daniel found a pink shell and put it back in the sand
****
Answer:
No
[Q]: Well, there was an interest in having a uniform rule, and that's precisely why the Framers created the Copyright Clause in the Constitution, but there was copyright protection in some States, there wasn't copyright protection in other States, and what we know from the decision of this Court in the Wheaton decision is that there was not a common law copyright in existence. This Court explicitly held that. Now, the petitioners make this quid pro quo to draw the line as well as in how long a line The Framers created the Copyright Clause in the Constitution because they all had an interest in a uniform rule for copyright protection. OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No
[A]: It's impossible to say
Problem: That the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications have power to sit at 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday December 9, 1997, for its study of Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Canada Shipping Act (maritime liability), even though the Senate may then be sitting and that rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "That the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications have power to sit before 4:00 p.m"? OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No

A: No
Context:
I am not aware of the particular role that the Privy Council Office would play specifically in providing security arrangements, but I am sure that all of that information would come forward as soon as the Public Complaints Commission is allowed to get on with its work, and to hear from all of the relevant witnesses.
Hypothesis: I am sure that all of that information would come forward as soon as the Public Complaints Commission located in North Carolina is allowed to get on with its work OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No
It's impossible to say