ITALY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Pier Luigi Roncaglia, Francesco Rossi, Riccardo Perotti and Noemi Parrotta, Spheriens
legislative policy choice to subject mass-pro - duced industrial goods to a rigorous merits test before granting access to copyright protection. As for the interpretation of the requirement by case law, a clear orientation has gradually emerged, anchoring the assessment of “artistic value” to objective criteria. In particular, empha - sis has been placed on “objective” elements such as accolades from critics and cultural insti - tutions, inclusion in the collections of design or contemporary art museums, or clear affiliation with certain artistic or cultural movements. For instance, the Court of Milan, in a 2012 judgment, reiterated that “the legislator’s choice to limit copyright protection for industrial design works to those possessing, in addition to a creative character... an ‘artistic value,’ undoubtedly rais - es the threshold for such protection far above that required for design registration”. The court further clarified that “determine whether a work of industrial design possesses artistic value, it is necessary to assess, in the most objective man - ner possible, the established perception of the work within the community, particularly in broad - er cultural circles”. It also stated that “in this context, the widespread recognition of a design work’s artistic quality by cultural institutions car - ries significant weight. This recognition demon - strates the work’s alignment with and expression of artistic trends and movements, beyond the intentions or awareness of its creator”. Address - ing the objection that such an approach ties the intrinsic and original character of the work to events occurring after its creation, the court further clarified: “The consolidation over time of explicit and unanimous recognition by crit - ics, cultural institutions, and museums does not constitute the foundational basis for attributing artistic value to a work of industrial design – an attribution inherently linked to the creative act. Instead, it represents the manifestation and
shared acknowledgment of the work’s belonging to the category of copyright-protectable works” (Court of Milan, 2 August 2012). These principles have also been applied to fash - ion products, although not that frequently. For instance, the Court of Milan, in a judgment of 12 July 2016, held that “Moon Boots”, the leg - endary après-ski boots designed in the 1970s, qualify for copyright protection, finding that boots “can well boast the characteristics of a creative work, endowed with artistic value... in view of their particular aesthetic impact, which, upon their appearance on the market, pro - foundly changed the aesthetic conception of the après-ski boot, becoming a true icon of Italian design and its ability to irreversibly evolve the taste of an entire historical era with respect to objects of everyday use”. The court particularly emphasised that the product had won national and international awards, been widely featured in monographs on contemporary, Italian, and international design, and received favourable criticism from experts and designers. Moreo - ver, the Moon Boots had “garnered widespread and enduring public approval” and were chosen by the Louvre Museum in 2000 as one of the 100 most significant symbols of 20th-century design internationally. The court concluded that all these factors collectively indicate that the Moon Boots represent a prime example of how industrial design can elevate everyday objects to the realm of art, understood as a creative and innovative interpretation of the world. This “objective” approach has also been endorsed by the Italian Supreme Court, which has confirmed that “artistic value” should be inferred from objective indicators, not neces - sarily cumulative. These indicators include rec - ognition by cultural and institutional circles of a work’s aesthetic and artistic qualities, exhibition
243 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook