Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Legal Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Italy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Legal Protection of the Intangible Cultural Heritage

Abstract

The text first provides a framework about the contribution of Italy in UNESCO, its internal coordination also through the National Commission, and the country’s position during the negotiations held for the approval of the 2003 Convention. Afterwards, the chapter addresses its analyses on the protection of the intangible heritage according to the Italian Constitution, the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape and a number of legal instruments adopted at the regional level to identify, support and promote the ICH. Finally, a description of the ICH inscribed by the country on the Representative List is developed, both at the national and transnational level, along with a specific investigation about risks and opportunities for the Italian elements recognized by UNESCO, as related to their domain, their representative communities and the intellectual property rights as safeguarding measures.

The chapter is the result of a joint reflection by the authors. However, paragraphs 1 and 3 has been materially written by P. L. Petrillo, para. 2 by T. Scovazzi, para. 4 by B. Ubertazzi.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For decades, qualified Italian expertise constantly aimed its efforts through interventions of the Italian school of restorers and archaeologists, the fight against illicit trafficking of cultural heritage, and top research activities that our country conducts in the hydrological and oceanographic, seismic, environmental sectors or in theoretical physics through scientific activities at the above center of Trieste. Through an ad hoc MoU signed with UNESCO in February 2016, Italy also promoted the creation of a new kind of rapid reaction force to step in wherever art treasures are threatened by war or natural disaster: the so-called “cultural blue berets” initiative operates within the framework of UNESCO’s “Unite4Heritage” campaign for the safeguarding of cultural heritage against massive attacks and destruction, and is supported by the highly qualified experience of the Carabinieri of the Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage.

  2. 2.

    Nearly 12 million USD each year (3.7% of the Organization’s total budget); along with the extrabudgetary contributions (more than 130 million USD in 2013–2016), this figure makes Italy one of the largest contributors to the UNESCO System. For an overall glance, see the document “Key facts and figures on Italy / UNESCO Cooperation”, updated on 2018 by the Italian Permanent Delegation: http://www.delegazioneunesco.esteri.it/rappunesco/resource/doc/2018/01/ita_facts_figures_3.01.2018.pdf (accessed December 15, 2018).

  3. 3.

    As well to other UNESCO initiatives as the nominations to the World Heritage List. In the ICH Convention, the adoption of such a mechanism is also consistent with the efforts invested by Italy during its mandate as member state of the Intergovernmental Committee (2008–2011) and the participation to the Subsidiary Body in 2011, meant to rationalize the enormous number of nominations submitted to the Secretariat, and to facilitate trans-national initiatives in line with the spirit of the Convention, through a priority mechanisms eventually adopted.

  4. 4.

    The Law 77/2006 on “Special measures for the protection and fruition of Italian sites and elements of cultural, landscape and environmental interest, included in the “World Heritage List”, under the protection of UNESCO” originated from the urgency to ensure, after the outcomes of the WHC first cycle of the periodic reporting (2001–2006), or update, the management plans of Italian WHS, as well as to support the initiatives of safeguard, fruition and dissemination. To implement the law, the Commission, established at the Ministry of cultural heritage and tourism, together with the representatives of the relevant Ministries (and the State-Regions Conference), allocates every year the funds provided by Law 77/2006 according to the quality of the submitted projects (as per the relevant indicators) and a strict evaluation process rewarding the best proposals.

  5. 5.

    See https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/art-of-dry-stone-walling-knowledge-and-techniques-01393 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  6. 6.

    See supra, chapter 1, paras. 2 and 5.

  7. 7.

    See supra, chapter 1, paras. 2 and 3.

  8. 8.

    “Mediterranean Diet”, “Traditional Agricultural Practice of Cultivating the ‘Vite ad Alberello’ (Head-trained Bush Vines) of the Community of Pantelleria” and “Art of Neapolitan ‘Pizzaiuolo’”. See Petrillo (2012); see also Petrillo et al. (2015).

  9. 9.

    By Decision 3.COM 1 of 2008, the Committee decided to incorporate in the Representative List the ninety items already proclaimed “Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity” before the entry into force of the ICH Convention. They included two Italian elements, namely “Opera dei Pupi, Sicilian Puppet Theatre” and “Canto a Tenore, Sardinian Pastoral Songs”.

  10. 10.

    “The following provisions shall apply to States Parties which have a federal or non-unitary constitutional system: (a) with regard to the provisions of this Convention, the implementation of which comes under the legal jurisdiction of the federal or central legislative power, the obligations of the federal or central government shall be the same as for those States Parties which are not federal States; (b) with regard to the provisions of this Convention, the implementation of which comes under the jurisdiction of individual constituent States, countries, provinces or cantons which are not obliged by the constitutional system of the federation to take legislative measures, the federal government shall inform the competent authorities of such States, countries, provinces or cantons of the said provisions, with its recommendation for their adoption”.

  11. 11.

    Law no. 310 of April 26, 1964 instituted an ad hoc Commission for investigating the protection and enhancement of the historical, archaeological, artistic and landscape heritage. The Franceschini Commission, named after its chairman, Francesco Franceschini, was a group composed by members of Parliament and experts in the above fields which was responsible for revising the legislation, the administrative framework and the funding mechanisms for cultural heritage protection. The Commission concluded its work in 1966 by producing 84 declarations, summarized in nine recommendations for urgent action.

  12. 12.

    Proclaimed in 2001 under the UNESCO “Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity” and later inscribed on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity (2008). For more information, please refer to chapter 1o, para. 4. below.

  13. 13.

    Constitutional Court, ruling no. 118 of March 6, 1990. See: Carpentieri P., Il decoro dei monumenti deve attendere le intese con le Regioni: come subordinare la tutela (art. 9 Cost.) al commercio e alla “leale collaborazione” interistituzionale, in Giurisprudenza costituzionale; Sabato G., La tutela del patrimonio culturale nella giurisprudenza costituzionale e amministrativa, in Giornale di diritto amministrativo; Sciullo G., Corte costituzionale e nuovi scenari per la disciplina del patrimonio culturale, in www.aedon.it. See also Frosini (2019).

  14. 14.

    Out of 147 organizations or institutions accredited thus far by the General Assembly, because they meet the criteria set out in para. 91 of the Operational Directives and upon their request as per form ICH-09, the Italian NGOs that provide services to the Intergovernmental Committee of the Convention are the following: Italian Geographical Society Onlus (SGI), Italian Society for Museum and Heritage Anthropology (SIMBDEA), Italian Network of Pro Loco Associations (UNPLI), Musa Association - Music, Songs and traditional Dances (serving the Evaluation Body in 2009), Association for the conservation of folk traditions, Sant’Antuono and the Battuglie of Pastellessa Association, MusicaEuropa Association, Cultural Association ‘Bagpipe Club’, Cultural Musical Ethnic Association Totarella—The Pollino Bagpipes.

  15. 15.

    To track the evolution of the state of implementation of the UNESCO 2003 Convention by Italy, see also the periodic report last submitted (on time) on December 15, 2013 and examined by the Intergovernmental Committee in 2014: https://ich.unesco.org/en-state/italy-IT?info=periodic-reporting#rp (accessed December 15, 2018).

  16. 16.

    Such as, for example: Archive of Ethnography and Social History of Lombardy Region; Provincial Archive of Oral Tradition and Museum of Customs of the Trentino People, in Province of Trento; Centre for Anthropological Documentation and Research in Valnerina; Regional Centre for Documentation of the Cultural Heritage of Lazio Region; Regional Centre for Cataloguing and Restoration of the Cultural Heritage of Friuli-Venezia Giulia; Regional Centre for graphic, photographic, aerophotographic, photogrammetric, and audiovisual cataloguing, documentation and inventory of Sicily; Regional Institute of Ethnography of Sardinia.

  17. 17.

    Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of October 17, 2003, Art 2.2, see: https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention (accessed December 15, 2018).

  18. 18.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Eighth session, Baku, Azerbaijan, December 2 to 7, 2013, Decision 8.COM 8.10, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/decisions/8.COM/8.10 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  19. 19.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Twelfth session, Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, December 4 to 9, 2017, Decision 12.COM 11.B.17, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/d%C3%A9cisions/12.COM/11.B.17 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  20. 20.

    Ibid.

  21. 21.

    On culinary traditions, see: Scovazzi (2012), pp. 181, 183–188; Maffei (2012), cit.

  22. 22.

    Expert Meeting on Documenting and Archiving Intangible Cultural Heritage, Paris, January 12 to 13, 2006, CLT/CH/ITH/DOCEM0106, p. 10, available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000144592 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  23. 23.

    UNESCO, Social practices, rituals and festive events, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/social-practices-rituals-and-00055 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  24. 24.

    Ibid.

  25. 25.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2013), Nomination File for Mediterranean Diet, p. 5, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/download.php?versionID=20926 (accessed December 16, 2018); Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2017), Nomination File for the Art of Neapolitan ‘Pizzaiuolo’, p. 3, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/download.php?versionID=43875 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  26. 26.

    The Subsidiary Body was established by the Committee to evaluate nominations for inscription on the Representative List. See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Seventh session, Paris, France, December 3 to 7, 2012, Decision 7.COM 12.c, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/d%C3%A9cisions/7.COM/12.C?dec=decisions&ref_decision=7.COM (accessed December 16, 2018).

  27. 27.

    Report of the Subsidiary Body on its work in 2013 and examination of nominations for inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, ITH/13/8.COM/8 Add.2, para. 51, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/src/ITH-13-8.COM-8+Add.2-EN.doc (accessed December 16, 2018). See also Compte-rendu des journées de Vitré sur les pratiques alimentaires, April 3, 2009: “Président du Comité intergouvernemental et la chef de la Section du patrimoine culturel immatériel de l’UNESCO et Secrétaire de la Convention”, available at: http://www.iiac.cnrs.fr/article1007.html (accessed December 16, 2018): “Si les pratiques alimentaires ne sont pas explicitement mentionnées à l’article 2 (“ Définitions “) de la Convention, celles-ci sont néanmoins parties intégrantes du patrimoine culturel immatériel (…) Il a été souligné d’emblée que les pratiques alimentaires ne devraient pas être considérées uniquement comme une réponse aux besoins biologiques, mais comme des expériences culturellement élaborées par les groupes humains tout au long de leur histoire. (…) Les experts ont estimé que, dans le cadre de la Convention, les pratiques alimentaires ont une dimension transversale vis-à-vis des domaines explicités à l’article 2 alinéa 2 en tant qu’elles s’intègrent à des systèmes articulés de relations sociales et de significations collectivement partagées. Les pratiques alimentaires concernent donc aussi bien les traditions et expressions orales, les arts du spectacle, les pratiques sociales, rituels et événements festifs, les connaissances et pratiques concernant la nature, ainsi que les savoir-faire liés à l’artisanat traditionnel. D’autre part, les experts ont considéré que les pratiques alimentaires ne sauraient être réduites à un ou plusieurs actes ou étapes de leur élaboration, mais que celles-ci se donnent à voir comme un processus structuré et complexe qui va de l’obtention des matières premières jusqu’à l’acte de consommation. Les experts ont estimé qu’en tant que patrimoine culturel immatériel, les pratiques alimentaires doivent être appréhendées dans leur profondeur historique et leur spécificité culturelle, autant dans leur ancrage local que dans leur résonance et mobilité. À cet égard, les pratiques alimentaires peuvent, par exemple, transcender les frontières et être partagées.”

  28. 28.

    The Evaluation Body was established by the Committee following amendments to the Operational Directives abolishing the Subsidiary Body to evaluate nominations for inscription on the Representative List and to the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding, proposals to the Register of Good Safeguarding Practices and requests for International Assistance greater than US$100,000. See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 11.COM 11 cit.

  29. 29.

    Report of the Evaluation Body on its work in 2017, ITH/17/12.COM/11, para. 20, available at the webpage of the 12th session of the ICH Committee: https://ich.unesco.org/en/12com (accessed December 16, 2018).

  30. 30.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 12.COM 11.B.17 cit.

  31. 31.

    Ibid.

  32. 32.

    Convention, Preamble.

  33. 33.

    Ibid., Art. 2.1.

  34. 34.

    Ibid., Art. 2.1.

  35. 35.

    Ibid., Art. 11, lett. b).

  36. 36.

    Operational Directives for the Implementation of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, adopted by the General Assembly of the States Parties to the Convention at its second session (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 16 to 19 June 2008), amended at its third session (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 22 to 24 June 2010), its fourth session (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 4 to 8 June 2012), its fifth session (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 2 to 4 June 2014), its sixth session (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 30 May to 1 June 2016) and its seventh session (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 4 to 6 June 2018). Available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/src/ICH-Operational_Directives-7.GA-PDF-EN.pdf (accessed December 16, 2018).

  37. 37.

    UNESCO Representative List ICH-02 Form, ICH-02-2020-EN, Part D, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/forms (accessed December 16, 2018).

  38. 38.

    Skountipara A. (2012), Discussion paper: Possible ways to deal with “similar elements”: the extension of an inscribed element and the nomination of ‘serial elements’, Open ended intergovernmental working group on the right scale or scope of an element, Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, ITH/12/7.COM WG/, paras. 15–19. Available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/src/ITH-12-7.COM_WG-5-EN.doc (accessed December 16, 2018).

  39. 39.

    Ibid., para. 19.

  40. 40.

    Ibid.

  41. 41.

    Report of the Subsidiary Body on its work in 2013 and examination of nominations for inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, ITH/13/8.COM/8 Add.2, para. 20, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/src/ITH-13-8.COM-8+Add.2-EN.doc (accessed December 16, 2018).

  42. 42.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 8.COM 8.16 cit.

  43. 43.

    Ibid.

  44. 44.

    Operational Directives (2016), Chapter I, I.5. Multi-national files, para. 13.

  45. 45.

    Skountipara, Discussion paper, cit., para. 16.

  46. 46.

    Ibid.

  47. 47.

    Ibid., paras. 15–19.

  48. 48.

    Ibid., para. 19.

  49. 49.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 8.COM 8.16, cit.

  50. 50.

    Report of the Subsidiary Body on its work in 2013 and examination of nominations for inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, cit., para. 20.

  51. 51.

    Ibid.

  52. 52.

    Nomination file for the Art of Neapolitan ‘Pizzaiuolo’, cit., p. 2.

  53. 53.

    Ibid. p. 6.

  54. 54.

    Ibid.

  55. 55.

    Namely, the Presidents of Associazione Verace Pizza Napoletana (AVPN) Australia, America, Japan, and Korea. See the list of participants of the twelfth session of the Intergovernmental Committee, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/preliminary-list-of-participants-00948 (accessed on December 16, 2018).

  56. 56.

    Nomination file for the Art of Neapolitan ‘Pizzaiuolo’, cit., p. 6.

  57. 57.

    See Operational Directives (2016), Chapter I, I.1 and I.2.

  58. 58.

    UNESCO Representative List ICH-02 Form, cit., Part 4.b.

  59. 59.

    Ibid.

  60. 60.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2014), Nomination File for traditional agricultural practice of cultivating the ‘vite ad alberello’ (head-trained bush vines) of the community of Pantelleria, p. 14, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/download.php?versionID=30503 (accessed on December 16, 2018).

  61. 61.

    Ibid.

  62. 62.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2016), Nomination file Falconry, a living human heritage, p. 29, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/download.php?versionID=40754 (accessed on December 16, 2018).

  63. 63.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 12.COM 11.B.17 cit.

  64. 64.

    Pizzanelmondo, Vittoria! L’arte del Pizzaiuolo Napoletano è Patrimonio dell’Umanita, available at: http://www.pizzanelmondo.org/vittoria-larte-del-pizzaiuolo-napoletano-e-patrimonio-dellumanita/1272 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  65. 65.

    Nomination file for the Art of Neapolitan ‘Pizzaiuolo’, cit., p. 6.

  66. 66.

    Ibid.

  67. 67.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 12.COM 11.B.17 cit.

  68. 68.

    See Ubertazzi (2012), p. 469 et seq.; Di Blase (2007), p. 511 ff.; Zagato (2008), p. 60; von Lewinski (2008), passim.; Kono (2009a), passim.; Hilty (2009), p. 833 ff.; Peukert (2012), para. 10, available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1592263 (accessed December 15, 2018); Scovazzi (2011), p. 311.

  69. 69.

    The Protocol was adopted by the Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on biodiversity during its tenth anniversary on October 29, 2010, in Nagoya, Japan. The Protocol entered into force on October 12, 2014. Signatures so far: 92. EU ratification occurred on May 16, 2014. See the text of the Protocol and the state of signatures and ratifications in http://www.cbd.int/abs/ (accessed December 15, 2018). See Kono and Wrbka (2010), p. 205; see also Santilli (2012).

  70. 70.

    See Convention, Art. 3.

  71. 71.

    See Intergovernmental Committee For The Safeguarding Of The Intangible Cultural Heritage, Tenth session, Windhoek, Namibia, November 30 to December 4, 2015, Item 14.a of the Provisional Agenda: Draft amendments to the Operational Directives on safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and sustainable development, para. 173. See also Expert meeting on safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and sustainable development at the national level, Istanbul, Turkey, September 29 to October 1, 2014; Draft Operational Directives on ‘Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and sustainable development at the national level’, para 3. See Operation Directives (2016), paras. 104 and 173.

  72. 72.

    See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Tenth session, Windhoek, Namibia, 30 November to 4 December 2015, Item 14.a of the Provisional Agenda: Draft amendments to the Operational Directives on safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and sustainable development, para. 173.

  73. 73.

    Operational Directives (2016), para. 173(b).

  74. 74.

    See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Tenth session, Windhoek, Namibia, 30 November to 4 December 2015, Item 14.a of the Provisional Agenda: Draft amendments to the Operational Directives on safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and sustainable development, para. 173; Operational Directives (2016), paras. 116 and 117.

  75. 75.

    The Khmer court supported the Royal Ballet of Cambodia for over 1000 years, remunerating the dancers and providing them with a space to train in the palace.

  76. 76.

    UNESCO Living Human Treasure systems encourage States to establish a national system to introduce these forms of remuneration. Art. 2.3 places transmission among the safeguarding measures aimed at ensuring viability of this heritage.

  77. 77.

    While ICH consists in the first place of knowledge, skills and practices rather than products, the sale of the resulting products and services has often supported the continued practice and transmission thereof.

  78. 78.

    See Operational Directives (2016), paras. 116 and 117. See Calboli (2014), p. 456 et seq.

  79. 79.

    See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Seventh session, Paris, France, December 3 to 7, 2012, 7.COM.

  80. 80.

    See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Fifth session, Nairobi, Kenya, November 15 to 19, 2010, Decision 5.COM 6.1, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/decisions/5.COM/6.1 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  81. 81.

    See Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 5.COM CONF.202 and Operational Directives (2016), paras. 140–143. See Ubertazzi (2011), p. 777 et seq.

  82. 82.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Tenth session, Windhoek, Namibia, 30 November to 4 December 2015, Decision 10.COM 10.b.28, available at: https://ich.unesco.org/doc/src/ITH-15-10.COM-10.b+Add_EN.doc (accessed December 16, 2018).

  83. 83.

    See Operational Directives (2016), paras. 116 and 117.

  84. 84.

    Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, Paris Industrial Property Convention, adopted 1883 and revised Stockholm, 1967, 828 U.N.T.S. 305, Art. 6.

  85. 85.

    See Operational Directives (2016), paras. 145–150; See Ubertazzi (2011), p. 777 et seq.

  86. 86.

    See Kono (2009b), p. 289 ff.; Coombe and Aylwin (2011), p. 2027; Coombe and Turcotte (2012), p. 300; Coombe and Aylwin (2014), p. 778.

  87. 87.

    Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of June 15, 1957, as revised at Stockholm on July 14, 1967, and at Geneva on May 13, 1977, and amended on September 28, 1979.

  88. 88.

    See the Rules, available at: http://www.cremonaviolins.com/en/the-consortium/the-trademark-cremona-liuteria-and-the-regulations/ (accessed December 16, 2018).

  89. 89.

    See the entry on the Register of Protected Designation of Origin and Protected Geographical Indications, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/markets/wine/e-bacchus/index.cfm?event=pdfEccgi&language=EN&eccgiId=8381 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  90. 90.

    See the trademark, available at: https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#basic/1+1+1+1/100+100+100+100/We%20are%20what%20we%20eat%20MedDiet%20Mediterranean%20Diet (accessed December 16, 2018).

  91. 91.

    We are what we eat MedDiet Mediterranean Diet, MedDiet Quality Label for Restaurants, available at: http://www.med-diet.eu/P42A469C464S462/MedDiet-Quality-Label-for-Restaurants.htm (accessed December 16, 2018).

  92. 92.

    We are what we eat MedDiet Mediterranean Diet, Restaurants, available at: http://med-diet.eu/P42A876C875S872/Restaurants.htm (accessed December 16, 2018).

  93. 93.

    We are what we eat MedDiet Mediterranean Diet, available at: http://www.med-diet.eu/ (accessed December 16, 2018).

  94. 94.

    Convention, Art. 2.1.

  95. 95.

    On TSGs see Tosato (2013); Deacon (in press).

  96. 96.

    World Intellectual Property Organization, Collective marks, available at: http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/collective_marks/collective_marks.htm (accessed December 16, 2018).

  97. 97.

    Ibid.

  98. 98.

    Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of June 14, 2017 on the European Union trade mark (Text with EEA relevance.), Art. 75.2, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R1001 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  99. 99.

    Ibid., Art. 75.1.

  100. 100.

    Ibid., Art. 79.1.

  101. 101.

    Ibid., Art. 79.4.

  102. 102.

    See Ibid., Arts. 84, 88.

  103. 103.

    See the entry on the Register of Protected Designation of Origin and Protected Geographical Indications, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/markets/wine/e-bacchus/index.cfm?event=pdfEccgi&language=EN&eccgiId=8381 (accessed December 16, 2018).

  104. 104.

    See the entry on the Database of Origin and Registration (DOOR), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/door/registeredName.html?denominationId=916 (accessed December 162018).

  105. 105.

    The trademark was also registered in the following countries: Denmark, Finland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Japan, Norway, Sweden, Albania, Armenia, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Benelux, Switzerland, China, Cuba, Czech Republic, Germany, Egypt, Spain, France, Croatia, Hungary, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Montenegro, Macedonia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Russian Federation and Slovenia.

  106. 106.

    See the trademark, available at: https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#basic/1+1+1+1/100+100+100+100/We%20are%20what%20we%20eat%20MedDiet%20Mediterranean%20Diet (accessed December 16, 2018).

  107. 107.

    Ubertazzi (2017), p. 564.

  108. 108.

    Report of the Evaluation Body on its work in 2017, cit., para. 23.

  109. 109.

    Ibid., para. 27.

  110. 110.

    Ibid.

  111. 111.

    Ibid.

  112. 112.

    Nomination file for the Art of Neapolitan ‘Pizzaiuolo’, cit., p. 9.

  113. 113.

    Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, Decision 12.COM 11.B.17 cit.

  114. 114.

    Ibid.

References

  • Calboli I (2014) Of markets, culture, and terroir: the unique economic and culture-related benefits of geographical indications of origin. In: Gervais D (ed) Research handbook on international intellectual property. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 456 et seq

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombe R, Aylwin N (2011) Bordering diversity and desire: using intellectual property to mark place-based products. Environ Plan A Soc Space New Borders Consumption 43(9):2027

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombe R, Aylwin N (2014) Marks indicating conditions of origin in rights-based sustainable. Univ Calif Davis Law Rev 47:778

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombe R, Turcotte J (2012) Indigenous cultural heritage in development and trade: perspectives from the dynamics of cultural heritage law and policy. In: Graber CB et al (eds) International trade in indigenous cultural heritage. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 300

    Google Scholar 

  • Deacon HJ (in press) Safeguarding traditional foodways in the EU: the traditional specialties guaranteed scheme. In Bortolotto C, Ubertazzi B (eds) At UNESCO feast: Foodways across global heritage governance, in International Journal of Cultural Property. https://www.researchgate.net/search/authors?q=deacon

  • Di Blase A (2007) I diritti di proprietà intellettuale applicabili alla cultura indigena e tradizionale. Comunicazioni e studi 23:511 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Frosini TE (2019) Diritto pubblico comparato. Il Mulino, Bologna

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilty R (2009) Rationales for the legal protection of intangible goods and cultural heritage, competition & tax law Research Paper No. 09-10, Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, p 833 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Kono T (2009a) Intangible cultural heritage and intellectual property: communities, cultural diversity and sustainable development. In: Kono T (ed) Intangible cultural heritage and intellectual property: communities, cultural diversity and sustainable development. Intersentia, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kono T (2009b) Geographical indications and intangible cultural heritage. In: Ubertazzi B, Muñiz Espada E (eds) Le indicazioni di qualità degli alimenti. Diritto internazionale ed europeo. Giuffrè, Milano, p 289 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Kono T, Wrbka S (2010) General report: protection and preservation of cultural heritage. In: Kono T (ed) The impact of uniform laws on the protection of cultural heritage and the preservation of cultural heritage in the 21st century. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 205

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Maffei MC (2012) Culinary traditions as cultural intangible heritage and expressions of cultural diversity. In: Borelli S, Lenzerini F (eds) Cultural heritage, cultural rights, cultural diversity new developments in international law. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrillo PL (2012) Biocultural diversity and the Mediterranean diet. In: Burlingame B, Dernini S (eds) Sustainable diets and biodiversity. FAO/ONU, Rome, pp 224–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrillo PL, Di Bella O, Di Palo N (2015) The UNESCO World Heritage Convention and the enhancement of rural vine-growing landscapes. In: Golinelli GM (ed) Cultural heritage and value creation, towards new pathways. Springer, Cham, pp 127–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Peukert A (2012) Territoriality and extraterritoriality in intellectual property law. In: Handl G et al (eds) Beyond territoriality: transnational legal authority in an age of globalization, Queen Mary studies in international law. Brill Academic Publishing, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Santilli J (2012) Agrobiodiversity and the law. Routledge, Abingdon

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scovazzi T (2011) La definizione di patrimonio culturale intangibile. In: Golinelli et al (eds) Nuove forme di valorizzazione e promozione delle aree rurali italiane - Il sistema UNESCO, Padova, p 311

    Google Scholar 

  • Scovazzi T (2012) The definition of intangible cultural heritage. In: Borelli S, Lenzerini F (eds) Cultural heritage, cultural rights, cultural diversity new developments in international law. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 181, 183–181, 188

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosato A (2013) The protection of traditional foods in the EU: traditional specialities guaranteed. Eur Law J 19(4):545–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ubertazzi B (2011) Su alcuni aspetti problematici della convenzione per la salvaguardia del patrimonio intangibile. Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 94:777–798

    Google Scholar 

  • Ubertazzi B (2012) Una nuova condizione per l’iscrizione nelle Liste del patrimonio culturale intangibile. Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 2012:469–474

    Google Scholar 

  • Ubertazzi B (2017) EU geographical indications and intangible cultural heritage. Int Rev Intellect Prop Compet Law 48(5):564

    Google Scholar 

  • von Lewinski S (2008) Indigenous heritage and intellectual proper: genetic resources, traditional knowledge and Folklore. Kluwer Law International, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Zagato L (2008) La Convenzione sulla protezione del patrimonio culturale intangibile. In: Zagato L (ed) Le identità culturali nei recenti strumenti UNESCO. CEDAM, Padova, p 60

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law and Economics, Unitelma Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

    Pier Luigi Petrillo

  2. ICH UNESCO Convention, Paris, France

    Pier Luigi Petrillo

  3. University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Tullio Scovazzi & Benedetta Ubertazzi

Authors
  1. Pier Luigi Petrillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tullio Scovazzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benedetta Ubertazzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Pier Luigi Petrillo or Benedetta Ubertazzi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law and Economics, Unitelma Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

    Pier Luigi Petrillo

  2. ICH UNESCO Convention, Paris, France

    Pier Luigi Petrillo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Petrillo, P.L., Scovazzi, T., Ubertazzi, B. (2019). The Legal Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Italy. In: Petrillo, P.L. (eds) The Legal Protection of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72983-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72983-1_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72982-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72983-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation