language and exposition of the elements of the text28. The work must be written with the use of expressions or images or with reference to curiosities that denote the author’s personality and his commitment to popularisation; in essence, it must be the non - trivial expression of the original idea and, in turn, must be distinguishable from any other creation of the same nature. Again, recipes may be subject to copyright with regard to the form of their disclosure, the result of personal and original research29. Thus, the presentation of culinary recipes, together with the collection of anecdotes and thoughts or the elaboration of advice, constitute an act protected by copyright, and the exclusive right of publication and exploitation is due, within the limits set by Law No. 633 of 194130. More generally, copyright allows the use of the work and, pursuant to Article 25 of Law No. 633 of 1941, lasts for the author’s entire life and for a further seventy years after his death; in fact, “with publication the work becomes part of the intellectual heritage of the person who” created it, “so that the use that others make of the theses and ideas expressed (...) does not infringe the exclusive right”31. It is not the idea that is protected, but “the intellectual representation, in original form (...) composed and expressed for its communication”32. Pursuant to Article 1 of Law No. 633 of 1941, creative works of the mind belonging to literature, music, figurative arts, architecture, theatre and cinematography are protected, whatever their mode or form of expression. Thus, in the gastronomic sector, the subject of protection is the recipe book, as it belongs to a literary genre, but this does not prevent others from exploiting the creation and re - proposing it. In short, copyright offers weak protection to the activity of a cook; it guarantees the exclusive exploitation of the work created to make dishes known, but does not prevent their imitation. Therefore, it is not surprising that “cuttlefish cappuccino” is offered in various restaurants. However, in those at a high level, the economic interest does not concern a dish, but the service offered in all its articulations, including the venue, the furnishings, the staff, the atmosphere, depending on the case, familiar or formal, as well as the inventiveness. The replication of the model by others does not create any prejudice for the author, as customers identify the offer with the venue, linked to the figure of the entrepreneur and his ability to create a unique 28 See Trib. Milan 10 July 2013, in Giur. it. rep., 2013. 29 See Trib. Milan 10 July 2013, cit.. 30 See Trib. Casale Monferrato 11 November 1996, in Giur. it. rep., 1996. 31 See M. Fabiani, Il diritto di autore, in Tratt. dir. priv., directed by P. Rescigno, 18th vol., Turin, 1983, 152 ff.. 32 Cf. M. Fabiani, Il diritto di autore, cit., 132 ff.. 30 CHIARA TINCANI
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==