Abstract
When a work is classified as a cultural heritage asset, the issue is no longer simply who owns the rights, but what can actually be done with it. Public-law restrictions affect its use, preservation, reproduction, and circulation, turning seemingly simple choices into decisions that must be reviewed in advance. The critical issue arises especially when the use becomes economically relevant. The result is a system in which access to the asset never automatically means freedom to exploit it. Understanding these limits is essential to avoid obstacles and assess the real feasibility of a project.
Can I freely decide how to use a cultural heritage asset?
Imagine you want to use a work for an exhibition or an advertising campaign: you have access to the asset, perhaps you even own it, and the intended use does not seem problematic. This is precisely where the difference emerges.
When a work is classified as a cultural heritage asset, the change is not merely legal, but operational. It is no longer enough to ask who owns the asset: the real question becomes what can actually be done with it.
This shift affects highly practical activities — organizing an exhibition, creating digital content, using images in a campaign, moving a work, restoring it, or even simply maintaining it — because it introduces a limit that is not immediately intuitive: access to the asset no longer coincides with freedom to use it.
The Italian Cultural Heritage Code introduces a principle that completely changes the perspective: the asset may not be used in a manner incompatible with its cultural value, and many activities require prior authorization (Article 21, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004), particularly when they affect the integrity of the asset or the way it is presented to the public.
This is not merely about preventing physical damage. Even a formally lawful use — such as a curatorial choice, a specific intended use, or a communication context — may be prohibited if deemed inconsistent with or harmful to the cultural value of the asset.
This is where the difference from ordinary private-law logic becomes clear. The issue is no longer whether a right exists in the abstract, but whether the activity is compatible with the cultural function of the asset.
In practice, this translates into several significant consequences:
- seemingly beneficial interventions may be blocked;
- organizational or exhibition-related modifications may require review;
- even “accessory” elements of the asset (decorations, integrated parts) are protected and cannot be freely separated.
As a result, decisions no longer depend solely on the owner’s will, but on an external assessment that may impose limitations even when the intended actions appear legitimate.
It is not enough to avoid damage: you must actively preserve it
The most significant change is not always the most obvious one. Once a work becomes a cultural heritage asset, it is no longer sufficient merely to avoid damaging it: an actual obligation of active management arises.
Under ordinary rules, the owner’s main duty is generally not to impair the asset. In the case of cultural heritage assets, however, this is insufficient, because preservation becomes a continuous obligation requiring concrete interventions over time.
This is not merely an abstract concept. Preservation includes specific technical activities — study, prevention, maintenance, and restoration — that must be planned and carried out over time (Article 29, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004). The asset must be monitored, environmental conditions controlled, safety ensured, and interventions scheduled before deterioration occurs.
The owner may carry out interventions, but not with complete freedom or autonomy. Such activities must comply with specific procedures and, in many cases, require authorization (Article 31, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004). In addition, the Ministry of Culture may order the necessary interventions or even perform them directly in place of the owner (Article 32, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004).
This completely changes the relationship with the asset. It is no longer simply an asset to be managed at the owner’s discretion, but rather an element generating structural and ongoing obligations.
This also has concrete consequences for cultural projects. Costs involve not only the use of the asset, but also its preservation; timelines become longer because interventions must be planned or authorizations obtained; and the organization of the project may require technical expertise that is not always already available.
From this perspective, a cultural heritage asset is not merely something to be used, but something that must be responsibly managed over time according to rules that do not depend solely on the owner.
Can I photograph a cultural heritage asset and freely use its images?
Once the limits on use and the preservation obligations are clear, a very practical question arises: if I can access a cultural heritage asset, can I also photograph it and freely use its images?
The answer often depends on how those images are used.
The Cultural Heritage Code establishes specific limits even with respect to reproduction methods. Certain techniques — such as molds or casts involving direct contact with the work, particularly in the case of sculptures or relief works — are generally prohibited unless specifically authorized. Reproductions without physical contact are generally permitted, but even in these cases they are not always unrestricted and may require authorization depending on the manner and purpose of use.
The real issue, however, is not how the image is captured, but what the image is used for.
This is where the legal framework changes: once the image of the cultural heritage asset enters into an economic activity, the use is no longer free.
Indeed, when reproduction remains within a personal or educational context, or falls within nonprofit cultural enhancement activities, the scope for use is broader. It is generally possible to photograph and share images, provided there is no physical contact with the work, no invasive equipment is used, and the preservation of the asset is not jeopardized.
However, if the images are used in activities that generate economic value — such as advertising campaigns, editorial products, merchandising, or branded or platform content — the use is no longer unrestricted. In such cases, the Code provides for a system of authorizations and fees, which must generally be negotiated and paid in advance (see also: The Image Rights of the Duke of Este, Unwitting Spokesperson for Balsamic Vinegar (Bologna Court of Appeal, Judgment No. 1792/2024) – Canella Camaiora).
There is no standard fee schedule. Conditions are established on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the nature of the activity, the manner of use, the duration, and the economic benefit derived from it (Article 108, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004).
As a result, even when access to the asset is permitted and reproduction is technically possible, the use of images may still be subject to specific conditions, including:
- submission of a formal authorization request;
- payment of a fee;
- imposition of specific limitations;
- provision of a security deposit to protect the integrity of the asset.
Ultimately, a cultural heritage asset may be photographed and reproduced, but once economic value is generated from its image, the use is no longer free and must be authorized.
Can I sell or move a cultural heritage asset?
At this point, after considering restrictions, obligations, and conditions of use, another question arises: can a cultural heritage asset be treated like any other asset — for example, sold, transferred, or freely traded on the market?
Again, the answer is more complex than it may appear.
Under ordinary rules, property can generally circulate without particular restrictions. By contrast, when dealing with a cultural heritage asset, ownership rights are limited by rules that directly affect the ability to sell or transfer it.
In some cases, the assets cannot be sold at all because they are inalienable (Articles 53 and 54, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004). In other cases, circulation remains controlled: transfers must be notified and may be reviewed by the public administration (Article 59, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004).
The issue becomes even more evident in the context of international circulation: export outside the national territory may be prohibited or subject to authorization (Articles 65 and 66, Legislative Decree No. 42/2004). This directly affects operations such as international loans, foreign sales, or participation in exhibitions abroad.
A cultural heritage asset cannot simply be treated as a commodity, because it retains a public dimension that continues to affect it even when it becomes part of economic transactions. Ownership remains, but it does not translate into complete freedom of disposition.
In practice, this means that every transaction must be assessed not only in light of the owner’s interests, but also in terms of compliance with preservation and protection rules.
When a work is classified as a cultural heritage asset, what is being managed is no longer merely a set of rights, but a system of public-law restrictions affecting every phase of the project and accompanying the asset throughout its circulation.
Reviewed by: Margherita Manca
Publication date: 14 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.
