With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". display in altered form. “The act complained of’ for the purposes of § 14.03(4)(b) is thus the display of the altered sculpture, not the isolated, onetime act of dismantling in 1988. The acts prohibited, therefore, have occurred continually since 1988, and a new cause of action has, in effect, accrued each day, with the three-year limitations period beginning to run each day that the piece has been displayed. In this regard, the limitations provision operates much like the New York common laws doctrine that continuous or recurring wrongs, such as nuisance or trespass, continually give rise to new causes of action. See, e.g., Rinaldi v. Viking Penguin, Inc., 52 N.Y.2d 422, 438 N.Y.S.2d 496, 420 N.E.2d 377 (1981); cf. Mount v. Book-of-the-Month Club, Inc., 555 F.2d 1108 (2d Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>). This action was commenced on February 23,

A: holding federal copyright laws threeyear statute of limitations not to bar acts of infringement occurring within three years of action despite fact that related earlier acts of infringement were barred
B: holding that acts of infringement occurring earlier than three years prior to suit are barred by section 507b but that triable issue of fact exists as to whether acts of copying and distribution occurred thereafter
C: holding that contributory trademark infringement requires some predicate act of infringement
D: holding that the plaintiffs earlier claims of infringement by possession and its later claims of infringement by use of its source code arose from the same nucleus of operative facts and therefore the later claims were barred by res judicata
A.