With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of Novir-Compliant Java Technology Sun asserts that its claim of unfair competition supports an injunction prohibiting Microsoft from distributing non-compliant Java Technology that fails to support Sun’s JNI and includes unauthorized language extensions. Specifically, Sun asserts that Microsoft’s distribution of software products incorporating non-compliant versions of Sun’s Java Technology as part of a scheme to “kill cross-platform Java by growing] the polluted Java market” constitutes an “unfair” business practice. Preliminarily, Sun has established a reasonable likelihood of success in demonstrating that Microsoft’s distribution of non-compliant Java technology violates the compatibility provisions of the TLDA. See Sun, 21 F.Supp.2d at 1119-22, 1122-25; Sun, 188 F.3d at 1120 (<HOLDING>). In addition, Sun has also demonstrated

A: holding that the burden is on the appellant to bring forth a record that demonstrates error
B: holding that substantial evidence demonstrates that microsoft violated the tlda
C: holding that a stay of execution is only appropriate where the movant demonstrates substantial grounds upon which relief might be granted
D: holding that a court may issue injunctive relief only when the movant demonstrates four factors substantial likelihood of success on the merits irreparable harm no substantial injury to the other party and furtherance of the public interest
B.