Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
scope of that license. See Shaver, 74 F.3d at 774-76 & n. 8; Gracen v. Bradford Exch., 698 F.2d 300, 303-04 (7th Cir.1983). If one receives a license to reproduce and sell five copies, then he may reproduce and sell five copies, but no more. See, e.g., Pinkham v. Sara Lee Corp., 983 F.2d 824, 831-33 (8th Cir.1992) (finding that promoter was authorized to reprodu f its use exceeds the scope of its license.’ ” Shaver, 74 F.3d at 775 n. 8 (quoting S.O.S., 886 F.2d at 1087); see also S.O.S., 886 F.2d at 1087-88 (“The critical question is not the existence but the scope of the license.”); Gilliam v. Am. Broad. Cos., Inc., 538 F.2d 14, 20-21 (2d Cir.1976) (noting that “[o]ne who obtains permission to use a copyrighted” work “may not exceed the specific purpo . 311, 314-19 (Bankr.D.Del.2001) ; In re Patient Educ. Media, Inc., 210 B.R.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a plaintiff who has not sustained any damage as the result of a transfer of property cannot seek to set that transfer aside as fraudulent
B. holding that nonexclusive licensees cannot transfer their licenses without prior authorization from copyright owner but that exclusive licensees can transfer licenses without authorization
C. holding transfer restriction granted right of first refusal in event of voluntary or involuntary transfer of stock
D. holding that transfer was proper remedy for improper venue even though the issue of transfer was not raised until the motion hearing in circuit court
E. holding that transfer was not discipline because transfer neither altered salary nor fringe benefits
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.