With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of information before the Commission is more directly governed by other statutes. The Open Meetings Act, K.S.A. 75-4317 et seq., and the Public Records Act, K.S.A. 45-201 et seq., are both applicable to the Commission. K.S.A. 1980 Supp. 75-4318(a); K.S.A. 1980 Supp. 45-201(a). The Open Meetings Act specifically authorizes discussion of “confidential data relating to financial affairs or trade secrets of corporations” at closed or executive meetings. K.S.A. 75-4319(h)(4). The Public Records Act exempts from disclosure “records specifically closed by law or by directive authorized by law.” K.S.A. 1980 Supp. 45-201(a). Neither of these statutes creates an affirmative right in SWB to prevent disclosure. Compare Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281, 60 L.Ed.2d 208, 99 S.Ct. 1705 (1979) (<HOLDING>). Nonetheless, we conclude the Commission erred

A: holding that the freedom of information acts exemption 5 usc  552b4 of trade secrets does not create an independent right to prevent disclosure
B: holding that foia exemption 4 did not apply because agency did not meet burden of showing that desired information consisted of trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are privileged or confidential
C: recognizing that even if a plaintiff claims certain information constitutes trade secrets its claim may not depend on that determination
D: holding that supplier lists can be trade secrets under indianas uniform trade secrets act which uses the same definition of a trade secret as montana
A.