The German Federal Court has ruled that Birkenstock sandals are not works of art and thus do not receive the same copyright protections.
Birkenstock Sandals Fail to Qualify as Art, German Court Rules

Birkenstock Sandals Fail to Qualify as Art, German Court Rules
German court verdict dismisses Birkenstock's claim for art classification, impacting copyright protection.
In a recent ruling that has garnered attention, a German court has confirmed that Birkenstock sandals do not qualify as art. The footwear brand sought to have its popular cork-soled sandals classified as artistic works in an effort to gain protection from copycat designs flooding the market. However, the court's decision, described as a "missed opportunity for the protection of intellectual property" by Birkenstock, maintained that the sandals remain practical design items and not artistic creations.
Birkenstock’s popularity has surged in recent years, especially following Margot Robbie’s display of a pink pair in the hit 2023 Barbie movie. Originally regarded as unfashionable, the sandals have transformed into a trendy choice, endorsed by celebrities like Kate Moss in the 1990s, and even making appearances at prestigious events such as the Academy Awards.
The firm, which recently achieved a listing on the New York Stock Exchange and saw its valuation skyrocket to approximately $8.6 billion, aimed to protect four of its sandal styles from being imitated by three rival companies. German law distinctly separates design from art. While design serves functional purposes, art requires an adequate display of individual creativity to warrant copyright protection.
Presiding judge Thomas Koch asserted that the claim of artistic status for Birkenstock sandals was "unfounded," emphasizing that true creativity must be evident for copyright to apply. Although the company is prepared to pursue legal avenues against imitators, this ruling by Germany's highest civil court marks a conclusion after varying decisions from lower courts. The first court supported Birkenstock, while a second court overturned that verdict. As the brand continues its efforts against knock-offs, the firm remains determined to defend its trademark designs robustly.