With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". For example, in National Medical Care, Inc. v. Espiritu, 284 F.Supp.2d 424, 435-36 (S.D.W.Va. 2003), the court found that copyrights in technical drawings depicting medicine cabinets did not protect against production of the medicine cabinets, even though they had been built using unauthorized copies of the plaintiff’s technical drawings. The court held that "[c]opyright protection only extends to as-built structures when the copyright is registered [as `architectural work’] under the AWCPA," id. at 435, and that the protection affording to drawings registered as technical drawings "does not extend to as-built structures, regardless of whether those structures have been built with reference to infringing copies" id. at 435-36. See also Niemi, 2006 WL 2077590, at *3-4 (E.D.Mich.2006) (<HOLDING>). The Plaintiff does not persuasively explain

A: holding that the use of copies or derivatives of copies of copyrighted technical drawings to manufacture a machine did not constitute an act of copyright infringement
B: holding that conversion and unjust enrichment claims were preempted by the copyright act since they were not qualitatively different from a copyright claim because they contained no extra element beyond those necessary to show copyright infringement
C: holding that the manufacture of a machine from a copyrighted technical drawing is clearly not copyright infringement
D: holding that without more for defendant to copy books published by plaintiff which were not covered by copyright and then sell these copies does not state a claim for unfair competition
A.