Cultural Argument used in Katy Perry Shark-3D-Print-Copyright-Thing

Einer der Gründe, warum mich die Urheberrechtsdebatte nur noch periphär interessiert, ist, dass es vor allem eine juristische Debatte ist und kulturelle Argumente um Viraleffekte und Populärkultur im Zusammenspiel mit neuen Kopie-Technologien nur am Rande vorkommen. Deshalb freut es mich sehr, genau ein solches kulturelles Argument in einer juristischen Auseinandersetzung zu lesen, am Ende ist das hier nämlich der einzige relevante Punkt (Hervorhebungen von mir):

Perry's lawyers […] argue that the only reason the Left Shark is valuable is because of Perry, and thus she should be able to control all the benefits from Left Shark. Except, as Sprigman points out, that's almost entirely bullshit. Perry didn't make the Left Shark a thing, but rather the internet made it a thing.

Likewise, I disagree with your suggestion that Katy Perry owns rights in Left Shark because any commercial value my client’s sculptures may have “derives solely from the public’s association of them with Ms. Perry.” That statement misunderstands the source of whatever (probably scant) commercial value Left Shark may possess. No one knew that one of the sharks dancing next to Katy Perry during the Super Bowl halftime show was Left Shark until the Internet told us so. The Internet decided that Left Shark’s flubbed dance moves were hilarious. It gave Left Shark his name, and then it made him into a meme. Left Shark isn’t really about Katy Perry.

Techdirt: Can't Make This Up: Katy Perry's Lawyers Use Left Shark Photo Taken By Guy They're Threatening In Trademark Application