Problem: Well, I think again that illustrates why the authority is vested in Congress to make these judgments rather than in courts to make these affect whether the judgments, because we're not talking about the effect on an individual author, or an individual creator. What the Framers of the Constitution were concerned about is a gross judgment with respect to what might generally provide incentives to the population --

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "Congress can create rules that circumvent the courts"? OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No

A: Yes

Problem: I -- no, Justice Ginsburg, we would not, and the reason is again related to the method we have adopted to interpret "limited times." We have not said that "promote the progress of science" is a general and independent constraint on the Copyright Clause authority. We've said it must be looked to to interpret the scope of "limited times," and unless retrospective extensions are forbidden, it will eviscerate the meaning of "limited times." That does not occur in the context of the scope of exclusive right, nor in the context of the power to secure. If that's --

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "The person is legislator"? OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No

A: It's impossible to say

Problem: They 'll think it 's splendid , '' said Amy , much impressed by the note .<br>'' Try it , honey .<br>Let 's hear the sound of the baby pianny , '' said Hannah , who always took a share in the family joys and sorrows .<br>So Beth tried it , and everyone pronounced it the most remarkable piano ever heard .

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "They were referring to flute."? OPTIONS:
- Yes
- It's impossible to say
- No

A:
No