Abstract
In cultural projects, discussions often focus on works and copyright. However, in events such as concerts, performances, and festivals, what is actually used is not only the work itself, but also its performance. This article clarifies the role of neighbouring rights held by performers and executing artists, explaining when these rights arise, which authorizations are required, and which forms of remuneration may result from their exploitation.
If a work is in the public domain, is authorization from the performers still required?
When organizing a cultural event, the first question is not only which works are being used, but also who is performing them.
The law protects not only authors, but also all artists who represent, sing, recite, declaim, or perform in any manner intellectual works, even where such works have fallen into the public domain (Article 80(1) of the Italian Copyright Law – Law No. 633/1941). The definition is intentionally broad and includes not only the most obvious figures — actors, musicians, dancers — but also dubbing artists, conductors, and artistic ensembles.
The decisive factor, however, is not subjective but functional: the artistic performance is protected as such, independently of the work being performed.
This means that even if the work itself is free to use (for example because it is in the public domain), the performance remains protected. This is precisely where one of the most common mistakes occurs.
People often assume they may freely use content because copyright has “expired,” forgetting that what is actually being used, in certain cases, is the performance itself.
Two artists may perform the same musical piece, but the result — and its economic value — can be completely different. One need only think of the difference between famous interpretations of the same aria by Pavarotti and Domingo: the work is identical, but the performance changes radically.
It is precisely this interpretative dimension that justifies legal protection. The performer does not merely execute the work, but understands it, re-elaborates it, and returns it through their own artistic sensibility.
Accordingly, concerts, shows, and festivals do not involve only works, but artistic performances. This is why using a musical composition is one thing, whereas recording or disseminating an artist’s performance is another.
When is authorization from performers required to record or broadcast an event?
Authorization from performers becomes necessary when the performance does not end with the live event, but is recorded or disseminated.
The critical point is the so-called fixation, namely the recording of the performance on any medium (audio or video).
As long as the performance remains confined to the audience physically present at the venue, the issue does not arise in these terms. The situation changes radically, however, when that same performance is recorded, even if only with the intention of reusing it at a later time.
This is where fixation comes into play: the recording of the performance onto an audio or video medium. This is not a neutral step. On the contrary, it is the moment in which the performance ceases to be merely a “live” event and becomes content capable of circulating independently.
From that moment onward, further uses arise that require the performer’s authorization, including (Article 80(2), Italian Copyright Law):
- publication of the video or recording;
- streaming (including through social media or the event’s website);
- broadcasting on television or online platforms.
These are not limited to obvious cases such as television broadcasting or streaming on digital platforms. Even uploading a video to social media, making it available on the event’s website, or any other form of dissemination falls within the same framework: these are uses distinct from the live performance itself and therefore require specific authorization.
In practice, this is often underestimated. Many events are entirely legitimate in their “live” dimension, but become problematic when someone decides to record or share them without having contractually regulated these aspects with the performers.
The issue, therefore, is not so much whether the event itself is authorized, but rather distinguishing between what has been authorized and what has not. Performing before a live audience is one thing; recording and disseminating that performance is another, and the latter is not automatically included in the former.
An additional element, less intuitive but highly relevant over time, must also be considered. Performers’ rights do not expire quickly: the law protects them for decades (Article 85 Italian Copyright Law), and the duration may be extended further where the performance is recorded and disseminated.
This means that a recording is not simply content that may be freely used, but material that remains legally protected over the long term.
And this naturally leads to the next practical question in event management: once authorization has been obtained, is the use of the performance truly unrestricted, or do further obligations remain?
Are additional royalties or remuneration required?
Alongside exclusive rights, the legal framework also provides for a system of remuneration. But when does this obligation arise?
The starting point is the following: when a performance is fixed on a phonographic medium — that is, a medium used for sound recording — and is made available to the public in such a way that individuals may access it at a time and place of their choosing, a right to remuneration arises in favour of performers and executing artists, independently of contractual agreements.
In Italy, these forms of remuneration connected to neighbouring rights are generally managed on behalf of rights holders by SCF, the collective management organization operating within the recording industry for the collection and distribution of such remuneration.
However, the system is not limited to its economic dimension. The performance remains linked to the artist even after dissemination. This means it cannot be reused in any context whatsoever: the artist may always object to uses that prejudice their image, and likewise, proper attribution of the artist’s name must always be guaranteed in publications and distributions.
What happens in practice?
In audiovisual productions, the law introduces a specific rule: performers are presumed to have transferred to the producer the rights of fixation, reproduction, communication to the public, distribution, and rental (Article 84 Italian Copyright Law). This is a functional presumption designed to allow unified exploitation of the audiovisual work. However, it is not an absolute rule: it applies only unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
In any event, the transfer is never final or complete.
The same provision establishes that, for subsequent exploitations of the work (broadcasts, dissemination, reuse), performers are entitled to adequate and proportionate remuneration, which cannot be waived.
This balance has also been strengthened by recent legislative reforms. On the one hand, performers are granted an actual right of termination where the performance is not adequately exploited (Article 84-ter); on the other hand, a mechanism of supplementary remuneration is provided when recordings continue to generate revenues over the long term (Article 84-bis).
This temporal dimension is particularly evident in cultural projects based on events, which do not end with the single live performance but generate content destined to circulate over time, as demonstrated by the performances at the Woodstock Festival, originally conceived as a live event and later becoming the subject of audiovisual exploitation and subsequent distribution.
Ultimately, cultural projects and events do not involve only works, but also artistic performances carried out not solely by authors, but also by performers and executing artists whose rights generate the protections and remuneration mechanisms described above.
Reviewed by: Margherita Manca
Publication date: 29 May 2026
© Canella Camaiora S.t.A. S.r.l. - All rights reserved.
Textual reproduction of the article is permitted, even for commercial purposes, within the limit of 15% of its entirety, provided that the source is clearly indicated. In the case of online reproduction, a link to the original article must be included. Unauthorised reproduction or paraphrasing without indication of source will be prosecuted.
