With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". evaluate each piece of evidence according to its independent worth. B. The Copyright Act of 1909 The plaintiff renewed its copyright in The URANTIA Book in 1983, by which time the Copyright Act of 1976 had become effective. However, the renewal section under which the book falls, Section 304, is identical to that of Section 24 of the Copyright Act of 1909. Furthermore, as the plaintiff correctly states, “[t]he passage of the [1976 Act] did not alter the definition of a Svork for hire’ for the purpose of renewing a copyright originally registered under the [1909 Act].... Thus, whether The URANTIA Book is a ‘eommis-sioned work’ must be decided under the Copyright Act of 1909.” (Pl.’s Br. at 5 n. 4.) See Stewart v. Abend, 495 U.S. 207, 217, 110 S.Ct. 1750, 1758, 109 L.Ed.2d 184 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Forward v. Thorogood, 985 F.2d 604, 606 n. 2

A: holding that under illinois law interpreting the meaning of a contract is a question of law determined by the court
B: holding renewal rights in pre1978 works require court to look to the language of and case law interpreting  24
C: recognizing a court must look beyond the plain language of a statute when the literal interpretation would lead to an absurd result
D: holding that if statutory language is plain and unambiguous this court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent
B.