Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
are strong.... Losses like these can be insured [through warranties]. ... The increased cost to the public that would result from holding a manufacturer liable in tort for injury to the product itself is not justified. Id. at 871-72, 106 S.Ct. 2295. The Court continued by explaining how contract law is designed to account for the costs and risks of a product's nonperformance: Contract law, and the law of warranty in particular, is well suited to commercial controversies of the sort involved in this case because the parties may set the terms of their own agreements. The manufacturer can restrict its liability, within limi 992)(citing economic loss rule to bar action for negligent termination of employment); Scott Co. of California v. MK-Ferguson Co., 832 P.2d 1000, 1005 (Colo.App.1991) ; Centennial Square, Ltd. v. Resolution Trust
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an agreement which required the submission of an affidavit of payment to subcontractors or lien waivers before payment was made by the general contractor was for the direct benefit of the subcontractors
B. holding that the indemnity plaintiffs liability was due only because of its legal duty as the property owner and not because of any active or independent negligence
C. holding economic loss doctrine bars negligence claim based on service contract
D. recognizing the general rule that a property owner is not liable for the negligence of an independent contractor
E. holding that the rule bars subcontractors negligence claim because no independent duty was breached
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.