Tomas Took a Number of Wedding Photos at Maura's Wedding

Tomas took a number of wedding photos at Maura's wedding. He was paid as the photographer. On all of the photographs, he appropriately noted in the bottom right-hand corner information showing that he was claiming copyright protection. Maura came to see Tomas three years after the initial photographs were taken and requested that he grant her permission to run off as many copies as she wanted at the local photo shop from the pictures that she initially purchased. The photo shop had refused to reproduce the photographs without his permission. When he refused to give her permission to do so, Maura started a heated argument. She told Tomas that photographs are not entitled to copyright protection. She also told him that even if he was correct that there was some copyright protection, it only lasted for two years and that, in any event, damages for copyright infringement are unavailable.
-Regarding Maura's claim that photographs are not subject to copyright protection, which statement is accurate?

A) She is correct. Photographs are not subject to copyright protection even if taken by a professional photographer.
B) She is correct but only because family pictures are involved. Family pictures may not be the subject of copyright, but landscape photographs may be the subject of copyright protection.
C) She is partially correct. Tomas was entitled to copyright protection on the first picture. After Maura purchased the first picture, however, she could make as many copies as she wanted.
D) She is correct only because Tomas had not registered the photographs for copyright protection.
E) She is incorrect. Photographs may be the subject of copyright protection.