We are delighted to invite you to our IP Summer Course in Munich again in 2025! From June 30 to July 4, you can look forward to a varied program entitled “IP Summer Course – Obtaining, Enforcing and Evaluating Intellectual Property Rights in Europe”, which will cover all important aspects of obtaining and protecting intellectual property in Europe. Find out more now!
“The team is excellent. They are genuinely interested in knowing the industry and the client’s needs.” “The range of skills is not only broad but also deep.” “Boehmert & Boehmert represents a gold standard in Germany […].”
These are the judgments of clients and peers about the law firm, which were determined by The Legal 500 research team and published for the first time in the current edition of “The Legal 500- EMEA 2025”.
By The Legal 500 jury, BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT is recognized in the categories “Patent prosecution”, “Patent litigation: patent lawyers”, “Patent litigation: solicitors”, “Trade marks” and “Entertainment”. The law firm receives with rank 2 the best rating for the legal field “Patent prosecution”.
For the first time, the jury has singled out 17 patent attorneys and attorneys at law for praise:
Dr. Markus Engelhard, Dr. Daniel Herrmann, Dr. Karl-Heinz Metten, Prof. Dr. Heinz Goddar, Dr. Dennis Kretschmann, Christoph Angerhausen und Felix Hermann (all „Patent Prosecution“);
Christian W. Appelt, Dr. Dennis Kretschmann, Felix Hermann sowie Christoph Angerhausen (all „Patent litigation: patent lawyers);
Dr. Carl-Richard Haarmann und Dr. Michael Rüberg (beide „Patent litigation: solicitors“);
Dr. Rudolf Böckenholt, Dr. Andreas Dustmann, Silke Freund, Dr. Sebastian Engels, Dr. Carl-Richard-Haarmann und Dr. Eckhard Ratjen (all „Trade marks“) as well as Dr. Martin Schaefer, Silke Freund, Dr. Andreas Dustmann for „Entertainment“).
In the field of “Patent Prosecution”, the jury praised the firm’s active filing practice, which occupies a strong position both geographically and professionally. The attorneys’ broad expertise covers sectors such as electronics, robotics, biotechnology and telecommunications and is complemented by knowledge in related soft IP areas such as design law. In addition to patent applications, the team also supports clients in portfolio development and represents them in litigation proceedings, usually in cooperation with the firm’s attorneys at law.
BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT has comprehensive expertise in nullity, infringement, opposition and appeal proceedings and can handle these seamlessly from a single source thanks to the internal cooperation between patent attorneys and attorneys at law, according to the jury’s verdict for the legal field “Patent litigation: patent lawyers”. The team is particularly adept in the medical technology, electronics and mechanical engineering sectors, including for clients in the USA and Japan.
According to The Legal 500, the law firm has now established itself in the German market for contentious patent proceedings („Patent litigation: solicitors“) and is a sought-after address for both medium-sized companies and large international corporations. Not least because clients benefit from the close cooperation between the attorneys at law and the in-house team of patent attorneys.
In the “Trade mark” area, the jury praised BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT for supporting its clients from the trade mark application to enforcement. The focus is on managing global trade mark portfolios, advising on strategic expansions, representing clients in cross-border disputes, including before the EUIPO, and providing support in the areas of anti-counterfeiting, licensing agreements and M&A transactions.
According to The Legal 500, BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT’s clients in the entertainment sector are primarily in the music industry and among film studios based in the U.S. The clients are advised and represented primarily in copyright disputes, the strategic protection of copyrights, data protection issues and the defense against infringement claims.
The Legal 500 analyzes and ranks law firms around the world in more than 150 jurisdictions. The annual rankings are based on feedback from 300,000 clients worldwide, submissions from law firms, interviews with leading attorneys and experts with extensive knowledge of the legal market.
On February 20, 2025, the Federal Court of Justice ruled in a landmark decision that the world-famous Birkenstock sandals do not enjoy copyright protection. The central question was whether the design of the popular sandals is protected as a work of applied art within the meaning of Section 2 (1) no. 4 of the German Copyright Act (UrhG). The District Court in Cologne had still assumed that the sandals were protected by copyright, but the Higher Regional Court in Cologne then denied this. These first-instance decisions had caused great uncertainty in the shoe-producing industry.
The plaintiff, which distributes various models of sandals as part of the Birkenstock Group, wanted to ensure that the sandals enjoy copyright protection as works of applied art – primarily to prevent cheaper copies. It argued that the special sole cut and choice of materials had resulted in an iconic and typical design, which, as a creative achievement, must be protected by copyright.
However, the BGH does not share this view, as already became apparent in the oral hearings: the design of the Birkenstock sandals is not sufficient to be considered a work of applied art.
Copyright protection requires a certain level of creativity that reveals the individuality of the author. There must be a scope of creative design that has been used in an “artistic way”. Purely technical work using formal design elements cannot be protected. In simple words: what is required is a creative design that goes beyond the functionality. However, according to the BGH, this is precisely not the case here.
The BGH emphasized that the existing scope for design had not been artistically exhausted in this case, but that the design of the Birkenstock sandals was primarily geared towards functionality. The sandals were not designed as works of art, but as practical “everyday objects”. Therefore, the simple and functional design of the sandals does not meet the requirements for copyright protection.
The decision of the BGH has far-reaching consequences for the question of the extent to which everyday objects can be protected by copyright. It shows that copyright protection in Germany is only granted for works that reach a sufficient creative level and do not merely have functional features.
However, Birkenstock announced that it would continue to take legal action against imitators. This is likely to be difficult after the BGH-decision. Although there is still design protection, the deadlines for Birkenstock sandals have already expired a long time ago: the term of protection for a registered design lasts up to 25 years maximum from the filing date, but the sandals were already designed in the 1970s. Therefore, copyright protection, which only expires 70 years after the death of the author, would have been more advantageous for Birkenstock…
In the 2025 edition of the Chambers Patent Litigation Guide, the three BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT partners Christoph Angerhausen, Dr. Daniel Herrmann (both patent attorneys) and Dr. Michael Rüberg shed light on the extensive area of “Law and Practice Germany”. In ten comprehensive chapters, the authors deal with the latest developments in the legal framework and implementation in practice. This includes, for example, information on alternative dispute resolution, current cost developments and the licensing of IP rights.
The article by Christoph Angerhausen, Dr. Daniel Herrmann and Dr. Michael Rüberg is available online in English on the Chambers website.
Chambers and Partners is one of the world’s leading independent legal directories. In addition to detailed rankings for various practice areas, the company publishes practice guides such as the Patent Litigation Guide. The annual guide covers 24 jurisdictions and covers.
The utility model is generally regarded as the “little patent”. However, embedded in an appropriate strategy, utility models can be particularly interesting for SMEs. The costs and effort involved are low compared to patents and yet they are suitable for diversifying one’s own innovation approaches, creating a defensive position against third-party property rights and making it more difficult to build up third-party patent portfolios.
In his article “A plea for the utility model”, BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT patent attorney Oliver Tarvenkorn goes into the details of a modern IP strategy, accompanied by tactical instructions.
The article was published in German in the March issue of Markt & Wirtschaft Westfalen (Market & Economy Westfalen) and is available online here.
