In CASE 11.1DC Comics v. Towle(2016), the court addressed the question of whether theproduction of replicas of a copyrighted item featured in a movie infringed the copyright owner's rights. How did the court rule?

Group of answer choices

A) DC Comics did not own a copyright interest in those productions so DC Comics lacked standing to bring the claim against Towle.

B) Towle was liable for infringing DC Comics'exclusive right to produce derivative works of the Batmobile character.

C) The Batmobile was"merely a stock character"and as a result, did not qualify for copyright protection.

D) Towle's replica Batmobiles were an indirect copy of the Batmobile character and therefore did not infringe on DC Comics'copyright.