Like a first-year art history professor, the company behind an iconic summer sandal has asked the age-old question: What really is art?
Driving the news: Germany’s highest civil court ruled that the Birkenstock sandal does not meet the bar to be considered a copyright-protected work of art. The footwear brand had taken three competitors to court over allegations they had copied its unique, artistic design.
- While a lower court previously ruled that the shoe was in fact a work of art, the judge in this case found that the sandal was a purely technical creation.
Catch-up: In many countries, including Canada, works of art are given much stronger copyright protections than functional products. Because of this, brands have tried to prove in court that their products are just as distinctive as sculptures or paintings.
- Ferrari secured a special copyright for one of its most famous (and expensive) models, a very rare case when an industrial product was deemed to have artistic value.
- High fashion brands like Jimmy Choo and Valentino have gotten protections for products like the Twist shoe and Rockstud tote bag that were considered new and creative designs.
Why it matters: With fast fashion brands copying trendy products en masse, stronger legal protections for original designs would go a long way. Even when copycats are caught, the laws are often so weak that designers are lucky to get listings for knock-offs taken down.—LA