In 2000, Dud Slyjester ("DS") sculpted a bust of one of his colleaguesJon Tulip. Indeed, everyone who looked at the bust thought it looked exactly like Jon Tulip. In 2001, DS began selling lamps using the bust of Jon Tulip as the base of the lamp. In 2002, Foulmouth Industries ("FI") made exact copies of the lamp and began selling them. Which of the following most accurately describes DS' rights under copyright law?

Group of answer choices

DS can successfully sue FI because FI's lamp infringes DS's right to prepare derivative works.

DS has no ability to sue FI under copyright law since the lamp is functional.

DS can successfully sue FI because the sculpture is separable from the lamp and, as a result, is independently copyrightable.

DS has no ability to sue FI under copyright law because the lamp should have been patented and you can't get both a patent and copyright on the same item.