In a recent legal verdict that has sparked discussions in the fashion industry, a German court has ruled against iconic sandal brand Birkenstock, determining that their renowned footwear does not qualify as works of art. This decision comes after Birkenstock sought copyright protection to prevent competitors from selling imitative versions of their popular cork-soled sandals.
The company’s attempt to classify its sandals as art was met with skepticism by the court, which ultimately dismissed the claim. The judge emphasized that Birkenstock’s shoes are primarily functional design items, rather than artistic creations deserving of copyright protection. Birkenstock expressed disappointment with the ruling, labeling it a “missed opportunity for the protection of intellectual property.”
Despite initially facing a perception of being uncool, Birkenstock footwear has experienced a resurgence in popularity in recent years. The brand received a significant boost when actress Margot Robbie sported a pink pair in the memorable final scene of the 2023 hit Barbie movie. Known for their comfortable and durable molded footbeds, Birkenstock sandals have evolved over the years to offer a wide array of color options and strap styles, originating from the classic leather-strapped design introduced in the 1960s.
Notably, Birkenstock’s journey to prominence includes receiving endorsements from influential figures like supermodel Kate Moss in the 1990s and making appearances on celebrities’ feet at prestigious events like the Academy Awards. The brand’s success culminated in its listing on the New York Stock Exchange in 2023, with a valuation of approximately $8.6 billion, double its value from just two years prior.
The surge in Birkenstock’s popularity has also attracted imitators eager to capitalize on the brand’s appeal. This prompted the company to take legal action against three manufacturers and retailers in an effort to safeguard four of its signature sandal designs. In the German legal system, a clear distinction exists between design and art in determining the protection of a product. Whereas design serves a practical function, art necessitates a level of individual creativity to qualify for copyright protection.
The pivotal question in this case revolved around whether Birkenstock’s footwear could be deemed as art, thereby warranting copyright safeguards. However, the court’s ruling underscored the necessity for a discernible degree of originality in design to meet the criteria for art and copyright protection. Judge Thomas Koch asserted that Birkenstock’s claim lacked the requisite level of individuality to be considered for copyright status.
In response to the verdict, Birkenstock affirmed its commitment to combatting counterfeit products with unwavering determination, utilizing all available legal avenues to defend its distinctive designs against imitation. The company’s stance reflects a dedication to preserving the integrity of its brand and preventing unauthorized replicas from diluting its market presence.
The final judgement delivered by the Federal Court of Justice, Germany’s highest civil court, marks the culmination of a legal
