Even in fashion-forward Milan, Birkenstock’s beloved cork-and-latex sandals aren’t getting a free pass as “art.” The Milan Court of Appeal has ruled decisively against the German footwear giant, rejecting its attempt to register the sole design of its sandals as a trademark—aligning with earlier verdicts from courts in Paris and Germany. The ruling concludes that the sole tread, no matter how famous, doesn’t qualify for copyright or trademark protection.
The legal skirmish began back in August 2015, when Birkenstock sued Italian family-run company Rafting Goldstar, part of Elvio Silvagni’s Silver1 group (which also owns Valleverde). The German brand accused Rafting Goldstar of infringing on its trademark by copying the design of the sandal’s sole. But the Milanese judges didn’t see any unfair or parasitic competition. Instead, they sided with the Italian shoemaker on all counts and ordered Birkenstock to cover legal fees for both levels of proceedings.
This ruling is the latest in a long and winding road of litigation across Europe. Birkenstock had argued that its soles deserved copyright protection as works of applied art—yes, art—hoping to secure stronger legal shielding for its iconic (and once famously unfashionable) sandals. But the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe struck down that idea, affirming a lower court’s view that the sandals lacked the required “individuality” to merit copyright.
Interestingly, an earlier ruling from the Cologne court had temporarily recognized the design as copyright-protected, siding with Birkenstock. However, that decision was overturned on appeal and upheld by Germany’s highest court. France followed suit. In January 2025, the Paris Court of Appeal reaffirmed a Luxembourg court’s ruling, again rejecting Birkenstock’s trademark registration of the sole and supporting Rafting Goldstar.
So, while Birkenstocks may walk red carpets and fashion runways, courts across Europe agree: they’re iconic, but not iconic enough to be classified as art.
