And according to reports, searches for these sandals soared 110 percent after the movie was released.
So much so that the company had claimed their footwear could be classified as art and so was protected by copyright laws in a case they put forward to stop rivals selling copycat versions of the cork-soled sandals.
But a German judge dismissed the claim, saying the shoes were practical design items – a decision Birkenstock called a "missed opportunity for the protection of intellectual property".
The company eventually listed on the New York Stock Exchange in 2023 and were valued at about $8.6 billion – double their worth in 2021. Birkenstocks' popularity means rivals often sell knock-off versions, prompting the firm to make the claim to protect what it called its "iconic design".
In this case, Birkenstock took three manufacturers and retailers to court, seeking to protect four of their sandal designs.
German law distinguishes between design and art when it comes to a product. Design serves a practical purpose, whereas works of art need to show a certain amount of individual creativity.
Art is covered by copyright protection, which lasts for 70 years after the creator's death, whereas design protection lasts for 25 years from when the filing was made.
Shoemaker Karl Birkenstock, born in the 1930s, is still alive. Since some of his sandals no longer enjoy design protection, the firm attempted to gain copyright protection by seeking to classify their footwear as art.
But the claim was "unfounded", presiding judge Thomas Koch said. His ruling added that for copyright protection, "a degree of design must be achieved that shows individuality".
This verdict by the Federal Court of Justice, Germany's top civil court, is the final judgement which comes after two lower courts had heard the case and disagreed on the issue. FYI, the first ruled in favour of Birkenstock, while the second overturned that decision.

























































