With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". and the Oprah Winfrey Show. According to a Baltimore Sun columnist, PROZAC® is “a designer label, a buzzword, a brand name familiar to ... Americans who have taken it, but also [to] those who wonder if they, too might find a cure for whatever ails them in the little green-and-off-white capsule.” Given this evidence, we cannot disagree with the district court’s conclusion that PROZAC® “has achieved extraordinary fame in American culture.” We therefore affirm the district court’s holding that Lilly has shown a likelihood of success in proving a likelihood of dilution. We also affirm the district court’s assessment of the remaining preliminary injunction issues. Irreparable harm is generally presumed in cases of trademark infringement and dilution. See Abbott Labs., 971 F.2d at 16 (<HOLDING>); American Dairy Queen Corp. v. New Line Prod.,

A: recognizing the wellestablished presumption that injuries arising from lanham act violations are irreparable even absent a showing of business loss
B: holding that potential loss of a contract constitutes irreparable injury
C: holding that the potential loss of valuable business may constitute irreparable harm
D: recognizing this presumption
A.