Sentence Correction

The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquattina Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.

(A) passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
(B) the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
(C) the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
(D) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
(E) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell

I was stuck between B and C.
I am able to eliminate B because of the ambiguous pronoun:'that they will sell'
Can I know how B/C can be distinguished based on the phrase 'in 1999'

gocoder wrote: Can I know how B/C can be distinguished based on the phrase 'in 1999'

which + SINGULAR verb must serve to refer to the NEAREST PRECEDING SINGULAR NOUN.

B: The passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages
Here, which allows (which + singular verb) seems to refer to 1999 (the nearest preceding singular noun), implying that 1999 allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages.
This meaning is nonsensical.
Eliminate B.

OA: The passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages
Here, which allows (which + singular verb) correctly refers to the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (the nearest preceding singular noun), conveying that the ACT allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages.
This meaning is sensical.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

gocoder wrote: Can I know how B/C can be distinguished based on the phrase 'in 1999'

which + SINGULAR verb must serve to refer to the NEAREST PRECEDING SINGULAR NOUN.

B: The passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages
Here, which allows (which + singular verb) seems to refer to 1999 (the nearest preceding singular noun), implying that 1999 allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages.
This meaning is nonsensical.
Eliminate B.

Thank you Guru.
From the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which , Is it not possible that 'which'modifies the near noun phrase 'Act ' since modifying nearest noun '1999' does not make sense ?

I am bit confused between cases when 'which'modifies nearest noun and when 'which'modifies near noun phrase.

gocoder wrote:I am bit confused between cases when 'which'modifies nearest noun and when 'which'modifies near noun phrase.

Check my second post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/sales-up-to- ... 38192.html