German court rules Birkenstock sandals are not art

A German federal court has rejected Birkenstock’s claim that its iconic sandals qualify as works of art, dealing a blow to the company’s bid to secure copyright protection for its distinctive designs. The decision closes a legal battle that saw Birkenstock facing off against rival manufacturers producing imitation versions of its famous cork-soled footwear.

In a case that reached Germany’s highest civil court, Birkenstock argued that four of its sandal designs were not merely functional but artistic creations, deserving of copyright status. Under German law, design protection is limited to 25 years, while copyright for works of art lasts 70 years beyond the creator’s lifetime.

The company contended that its long-standing designs showed the individual creativity required for copyright protection, citing the aesthetic and cultural impact of its sandals, which have evolved significantly since their original debut in the 1960s.

However, presiding judge Thomas Koch dismissed Birkenstock’s appeal, ruling that the sandals did not meet the standard of artistic individuality required for copyright protection. According to the judge, the footwear serves a practical, utilitarian purpose and does not demonstrate the necessary degree of creative uniqueness. “A degree of design must be achieved that shows individuality,” Koch explained, adding that the company’s claim was unfounded.

Birkenstock, now a publicly traded firm valued at approximately $8.6 billion after its 2023 listing on the New York Stock Exchange, expressed disappointment with the decision. In a statement, the company called the ruling “a missed opportunity for the protection of intellectual property” but vowed to continue fighting knock-offs. “Birkenstock continues its fight against copycats with undiminished vigour,” the statement read. “We will exhaust all legal means to defend ourselves against imitations.”

The company’s legal battle highlights the complex distinction under German law between design and art. While art is eligible for long-term copyright protection, products classified as functional designs only receive more limited coverage.

This differentiation proved critical in Birkenstock’s case. The company argued that its sandals had evolved into cultural icons, pointing to their recent resurgence in popularity. Once considered unfashionable, Birkenstocks have seen a dramatic reversal in fortunes, gaining endorsements from supermodels, celebrities, and even making appearances on the red carpet.

Their cultural cachet reached new heights when Margot Robbie sported a pink pair in the final scene of the blockbuster 2023 “Barbie” movie, cementing the sandals’ reputation as a fashion statement. The company also noted that its designs, known for their contoured footbeds and variety of colors and strap styles, have become a fixture in both casual and high-fashion settings. Nevertheless, the court found that these qualities were insufficient to classify the sandals as art.

The final ruling marked the end of a legal saga that began in lower courts, where opinions were divided. The first court sided with Birkenstock, recognizing a level of artistic merit in the designs, while the second overturned that decision, paving the way for the federal court’s ultimate rejection of the claim.

As Birkenstock continues its battle against imitators, the ruling underscores the challenges of protecting iconic designs within the boundaries of German copyright and design law.