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 its 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 its 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”.

Birkenstock said in a statement that it “continues its fight against copycats with undiminished vigour” by exhausting “all legal means to defend itself against imitations”.

This ruling 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.

The first ruled in favour of Birkenstock, while the second overturned that decision.