With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the cases uniformly refuse to impose such a duty. Were we tempted to create this duty, the gentle tug of the First Amendment and the values embodied therein would remind us of the social costs.”); Barden v. Harpercollins Publishers, Inc., 863 F.Supp. 41, 45 (D.Mass.1994). Therefore, to the extent that Plaintiffs complaint alleges that Dearborn violated § 17200 based on the contents of The Market Gurus, it is dismissed with prejudice. Can Plaintiffs nevertheless state a § 17200 claim based on Dearborn’s advertising of the book? Keimer held that, for purposes of a § 17200 claim, a book jacket and a videotape cover constituted commercial speech. Keimer, 75 Cal.App.4th at 1230, 89 Cal.Rptr.2d 781. But see Lacoff v. Buena Vista Publishing, Inc., 183 Misc.2d 600, 705 N.Y.S.2d 183 (2000) (<HOLDING>). Unlike Keimer, Cher and cases that follow it

A: holding that once a comic book character was drawn named and given speech it was sufficiently distinctive to be copyrightable
B: holding that exact same speech at issue in keimer the book cover flyleaf and introduction to the book which stated a fact made by the authors in the book itself was not commercial speech because it states a fact made by the authors in the text it is not about the book as a product
C: holding that the plaintiffs right to political speech is fully in accord with the publics interest in free speech and association
D: holding that first amendment does not permit a court to hold a dentist liable for statements published in book or made during news program even when statements were contrary to opinion of medical establishment
B.