Birkenstocks can be cool enough for Barbie, but the sandals are not qualified as works of art, judged a German court.
The company had affirmed that its shoes could be classified as art and were therefore protected by copyright laws, and led the case to prevent rivals from selling versions of copying its sandals to cork sole.
But a judge rejected the complaint, saying that shoes were practical design articles.
The Birkenstocks were once judged not cool, but in recent years have become extremely popular and have attracted more attention after actress Margot Robbie has won a pink of sandals in the final scene of the successful 2023 film Barbie.
The sandals, which have a molded sole, were congratulated to be comfortable and robust, and many color options and strap styles have evolved from the original leather version in the 1960s.
Even if he was initially rejected podiums, he quickly became a fashionable article, marking a seal of approval of the model Kate Moss in the 1990s, and even appeared on the celebrities feet in the Oscars.
The company finally enrolled on the New York Stock Exchange in 2023, assessing the company at around $ 8.6 billion (7.08 billion pounds Sterling) – Double its value in 2021.
The popularity of Birkenstocks means that rivals often sell direct elimination versions, which has encouraged the company to claim to protect what it called its “emblematic design”.
German law distinguishes between design and art with regard to a product. Design serves a practical objective, while works of art must show a certain individual creativity.
Art is covered by the protection of copyright, which lasts 70 years after the death of the creator, while the design protection lasts 25 years compared to the time when the deposit was made.
The shoemaker Karl Birkenstock, born in the 1930s, is still alive. Since some of its sandals no longer enjoy the protection of design, the company has tried to obtain copyright protection by trying to classify its shoes as an art.
But the complaint was “unfounded,” said President Thomas Koch.
His decision added that for the protection of copyright, “a degree of design must be reached which shows individuality”.
