Robin Developed a Great Soft Drink Marketed in the East

Robin developed a great soft drink marketed in the East Tennessee area.The major soft drink companies lost their market share and sued Robin for violation of the Sherman Act.She can prove,however,that her drink is enormously successful only because of her skill and foresight in recognizing the market need.Assume that Robin has seventy-five percent of the market share in the relevant market.How is a court likely to rule?

A) Robin will be in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, because a monopoly exists regardless of whether she attempted to monopolize.
B) Robin has not violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, but she has violated Section 1 of the Act under the "rule of reason" analysis, since the other soft drink companies have been effectively shut out of the market.
C) Robin has not violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, but she has violated Section 1 of the Act, because under a "per se" rule of illegality, Robin has cornered the market.
D) Robin is not in violation of the Sherman Act, because she innocently acquired the monopoly.
E) Robin is not in violation of the Sherman Act, because no monopoly exists.