Birkenstock Faces Legal Setback as Sandals Denied Copyright Status

Germany’s top court has ruled that Birkenstock sandals are not eligible for copyright protection, stating their design is functional rather than artistic.

In a closely watched decision, Germany’s Federal Court of Justice has ruled that Birkenstock sandals, despite their iconic status and global popularity, do not qualify as works of art and therefore are not eligible for copyright protection under German law.

The Legal Battle Over Sandal Status

Birkenstock, the renowned German shoemaker with roots dating back to 1774, brought legal action against several competitors for selling sandals that closely resembled its well-known models, including the Madrid, Arizona, Boston, and Gizeh. The company argued that its sandals should be recognized as “copyright-protected works of applied art” and sought an injunction to halt the production and sale of imitations, as well as the recall and destruction of existing copycat products.

What the Court Decided

The Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe dismissed Birkenstock’s claims, siding with the appeals court and confirming that the sandals do not meet the threshold for copyright protection as works of applied art. The court’s ruling made clear:

“For copyright protection, a level of design must be achieved that allows individuality to be recognized,”.

The decision emphasized that while Birkenstock’s sandals are distinctive and widely recognized, their design is primarily shaped by functional and technical requirements rather than artistic creativity. The court stated:

“A product can’t be copyrighted if ‘technical requirements, rules or other constraints determine the design’”.

And further clarified:

“For the copyright protection of a work of applied art — as for all other types of work — the level of design must not be too low. For copyright protection, a level of design must be achieved that reveals individuality”.

The Implications for Birkenstock

The ruling is a setback for Birkenstock, which had hoped to use copyright law to secure stronger and longer-lasting protection for its sandal designs, beyond the 25-year term offered by design protection under EU law. Copyright, by contrast, lasts for 70 years after the author’s death.

J Gutzy Birken, Birkenstock’s chief officer, expressed disappointment:

“The court’s decisions represent a lost chance for copyright safeguards in Germany. Nonetheless, the company would persist in taking strong measures against those who attempt to profit from the creativity and innovations of others”.

The Broader Context

The case highlights the legal distinction in Europe between design protection, which covers the appearance of industrial products for a limited time, and copyright, which is reserved for works displaying a higher degree of artistic creativity and originality. The court’s decision clarifies that not every popular or functional design can be elevated to the status of art under copyright law.

What’s Next?

Birkenstock has indicated it may seek further clarification from the European Union’s top court, hoping for a different interpretation at the EU level. For now, however, the German judiciary has drawn a clear line: comfort and style, no matter how iconic, do not alone make a sandal a work of art.