Under Italian law, the use of images of national cultural heritage assets must be authorised by the competent public bodies such as museums or ministries, and recent case law shows that disregarding this rule can lead to expensive consequences.

Italy is renowned for having one of the richest artistic and cultural heritages in the world; its breadth and value draw international attention and interest, so it is quite common for companies to use images of Italian cultural heritage assets for commercial or advertising purposes.

However, such use must be approached with caution, since cultural heritage is protected under Article 9 of the Italian Constitution. Once the cultural interest of an asset has been ascertained, reproducing its image is not permitted freely and requires authorization by the public body responsible for its management.

The Italian Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape

Introduced by Legislative Decree No. 42/2004, the Italian Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape was enacted to protect Italy’s cultural heritage and avoid potential detriment to the historical and cultural values of the country.

Article 107 grants to public bodies the power to authorize the reproduction of cultural assets for commercial purposes. This is a discretionary power, and authorization may be refused if the intended use “damages” or discredits the monument’s image.

Article 108 sets out the relevant concession fees and payments associated with the reproduction of cultural heritage assets. These fees are determined by the managing authority based on factors such as the nature of the use, its duration, and the economic benefits deriving from such use. The sanctions for the breach of these rules are determined by each public body. Moreover, if public bodies initiate civil actions, they may also seek compensation for damages.

Recent decisions on reproduction of cultural asset images

Public bodies are now keeping a closer watch on the reproduction of cultural assets. Recent decisions of Italian courts specifically concerning the reproduction of cultural assets for commercial and advertising purposes have already set important precedents.

A recent ruling by the Court of Appeal of Bologna – Judgment No. 1798/2024 of 24 September 2024 – concerned the appeal filed by an Italian company producing balsamic vinegar against the Ministry of Cultural Heritage. The Ministry had taken legal action against the company for using the image of the famous painting Duke Francesco I d’Este by Diego Velázquez in its trademark, without authorization and payment of the required fee. The Court recognized the existence of a right to the image of a cultural asset. According to the Court, “just like the right to the image of a person, governed by Article 10 of the Italian Civil Code, a right to the image of a cultural asset can certainly be recognized, given its collective value, which finds its legal basis in an explicit legislative provision”. As a result, the Court upheld the Ministry’s request to prohibit further use of the image and confirmed the company’s obligation to compensate the Ministry for economic damages.

The Galleria dell’Accademia of Venice and the Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage brought an action against the companies Ravensburger Verlag GmbH, Ravensburger AG and Ravensburger S.r.l. In its decision of 24 October 2022, the Court of Venice found that the image of Leonardo da Vinci’s artwork Vitruvian Man may not be used for merchandise (in this case, puzzles) in Italy and within the European Union without the consent of the Galleria dell’Accademia of Venice. The Court of Venice’s decision is significant as it rules that the Italian Code of Cultural Heritage applies even to companies based abroad.

Decision No. 1207/2023 issued by the Court of Florence on 21 April 2023 concerns the Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage’s claim for compensation against Edizioni Condè Nast S.p.A. for the unauthorized reproduction, on the cover of G.Q. magazine, of a lenticular image of Michelangelo’s David. The Court found that none of the conditions for lawful reproduction were met. There was no authorization from Gallerie dell’Accademia of Florence, no payment of the reproduction fee, and the image of Michelangelo’s David had been altered. Specifically, the lenticular printing technique combined the image of the statue with that of a model, thereby distorting the statue’s appearance. In doing so, the publisher was deemed to have devalued and obscured the high symbolic value and identity of the artwork. The court granted the request for damages.

Italy’s recognition of a “right to the image” for cultural heritage assets represents a unique case in the international legal landscape. Hopefully, future rulings by higher courts or legislative reforms may eventually lead towards a softening of current rules; for the moment, however, recent case law is a clear warning against the unauthorized use of images of Italian cultural heritage assets.

Thanks to Gioia Perucci for contributing this news item.

Further information

Questions on the use of images of Italian cultural heritage assets? Contact us, we are happy to help.