Abstract

Connecting with the previous reports, the Author calls into question the existence of a discipline concerning sponsorship of cultural heritage, giving relevance to the intangible status of the good subject of the sponsorship. Author underlines how the examples that are meant to demonstrate the existence in the italian law of intangible cultural goods - identified especially as the object of the UNESCO Convention on the Intangible Cultural Heritage and territorial trademark rules set in the Code of industrial property - are not coherent with standard of the national regulation on the cultural heritage, still based on the submission of a good to a Public Authority that, to ensure its public use, considers restrictions on rights of use and disposal of the owner, possessor or holder (that could be summed up with the notions of "vincolo" and "tutela"). Author also sketches out the main features that sponsorship discipline takes on when it concerns actions on cultural heritage due to the predominance of conservative needs (as for art. 120 of the Code of cultural heritage and landscape, that considers a compatibility check about sponsorship, to be carried out on the basis of a very extensive standard, encompassing the use or even the identity value of the restricted good); and the need for Public Authority, while choosing the sponsor, to respect rules for public tenders (as set in artt. 26, 27 and 199-bis of the Code of public contracts, including articulated provisions and regulations concerning planning and selection of activities that could be sponsored and the adoption of operational guide-lines apt to coordinate the above-mentioned compatibility check with the management of processes on activities award).