The creator of the 3D printed version of Left Shark, now of Super Bowl fame, has bitten back at Katy Perry over the copyright claim lawyers representing the singer lodged last week.

Fernando Sosa has retained law professor/lawyer Chris Sprigman, the same professor who was quoted last week as saying that Left Shark is not copyrightable because it qualifies as a “useful article,” which would mean copyright protection could not be extended to it as “it is not protected the same way as an artistic work.”

According to TechDirt, Sprigman has written to Perry’s lawyers:

Mr. Sosa is not especially eager to be fighting over copyright, but the legal merits of your claim seem very weak. (We also wonder what Katy Perry could possibly stand to gain from declaring war on an Internet meme, but that’s her business.) Mr. Sosa has a few questions that he wants answered before he will remove Left Shark from the other online stores in which it is available.

First, can you tell me why you believe the costume of a shark that you claim Katy Perry owns is copyrightable? As you likely know, federal courts and the United States Copyright Office have made clear that costumes are generally not copyrightable. Please tell me why you think the Left Shark costume should be treated differently.

Second, what is the basis for your claim that Katy Perry, and not some other person, owns the copyright? Did Katy Perry design the Left Shark costume? If so, when? If not, who did? Did that person transfer any copyright interest he or she might have (in reality, very likely none) to Katy Perry? If so, when?

The letter than provides further evidence that Perry never owned the copyright for the material, and humbly suggesting that the lawyers simply drop the matter.

In a blog post Sosa, after discussing legal representation, said that Left Shark has gone back on sale, although this time with friends:

I’m also resuming the sale of this 3D printed full color desk figurine at a different store front Etsy.com/shop/amznfx along with a couple other characters which include a drunk shark, pink drunk shark, and right shark.

It will be interesting to see what, if any, response Perry’s lawyers will give given it would appear that they partook in something that is sadly not unusual for copyright claims: a bogus takedown not based on facts versus the power and influence of the person or company making the claim.