Birkenstocks are comfortable and ubiquitous in the summer. German shoes come in many colors and shapes. Sometimes they look chic and sometimes they look embarrassing. But sandals can be taken in art?
This is what the Federal Court of Justice had to decide on Thursday, and decided that they are comfortable shoes.
The residence of Birkenstock, Linz in West Germany, and his shoes returned to 1774, presented the issue against the three competitors who sold sandals that were similar to his head.
The shoe manufacturer claimed his sandals, “simply cannot imitate the copyright copyrights that cannot be imitated.” According to German law, artwork are stronger and durable intellectual property than ordinary consumption products.
The company requested an order to make copies to do copious sandals and order to remind them and destroy them in the market already. Defendant companies were not identified in court expression.
Functionality and crafts Trumpets Art
This Thursday was the highest court of Germany this Thursday, the case was heard in the lower two courts, which did not agree on the subject.
While a Cologne Court knew the work of the clothes of the clothes, Colöne’s higher courts issued, later gave the appeals to the appeal, reported by DPA, reported by the German news agency.
The appeal court said he could not establish artistic achievements in sandals described by sandals with their signature.
Stream15:57Dupe Culture: Why ZZ hugs false
The online buyers penetrate the “Dupes” products that seem to be renowned items, but they are much cheaper. They say that consumers don’t say they don’t have to say that they don’t say something cheaper and designers and blows that they hurt the bottom line.
On Thursday, the Federal Court of Justice fell with the Court of the Cologne Supreme Region and rejected the case. In his power, he wrote a product that cannot be copyrighted if “technical requirements, rules or other boundaries determine the design.”
So when Birkenstock’s sandals, functionality and crafts do trumpets, at least in the eyes of the law.
“Because of the protection of applicable art work – in all kinds of other types of work, the level of design should not be low,” the court wrote. “Pure technical creation using the formal design elements cannot be eligible for copyright protection. Rather, to achieve copyright protection, the design level must be achieved by revealing individuality.”
2025-02-20 13:50:00
