Italy does not have a unified “fashion law” code.
The fashion and luxury industry is governed by a combination of general and sectoral legislation. Key sources include:
Additionally, beyond traditional statutory sector‑specific and enforcement rules, the National Chamber for Italian Fashion – Camera Nazionale della Moda Italiana (CNMI) has adopted the “Manifesto for Sustainability in Italian Fashion”. Under this framework, the CNMI issues technical guidelines on chemical management and eco‑toxicological requirements across the supply chain, as well as principles for retail practices and traceability. While these function as voluntary soft-law mechanisms, they operate as essential best‑practice benchmarks for supply‑chain due diligence by brands.
Several governmental and regulatory bodies oversee compliance in the fashion sector in Italy:
Italy is affected by several recent and upcoming legal developments at national:
Cross-border e-commerce in the fashion industry is primarily governed by the EU regulatory framework as implemented in Italy.
The fashion sector relies on several forms of intellectual property protection under Italian law:
Trade marks: protect distinctive signs identifying the commercial origin of products or services. Both registered and unregistered (de facto) trade marks are recognised, although unregistered marks enjoy more limited protection and require proof of public recognition. Protection may extend beyond word and figurative marks to 3D shapes, colour marks, sound marks, position marks, and pattern marks, such as the Louis Vuitton Toile Monogram.
Trade Mark Registration: Procedure and Timeline
Design Registration: Procedure and Timeline
Copyright Protection: Procedure and Timeline
Under Italian law, robust protection is indeed available, for both unregistered designs and trade dress through the Italian Civil Code and specific intellectual property provisions.
Fashion shows, photographs, lookbooks, and digital content are primarily protected under Italian Copyright Law (Law No 633/1941).
Beyond copyright, the unauthorised duplication, scraping, or systematic exploitation of a brand’s digital content, lookbooks, or event imagery by a competitor can be legally challenged under unfair competition law (Articles 2598 et ss of the Italian Civil Code). This prevents competitors from unfairly riding on a brand’s commercial investments, reputation, and marketing efforts by creating consumer confusion or engaging in undue competitive advantage.
Italian law provides several tools to protect fashion brands, product aesthetics, and commercial collaborations.
Brand Identity and Product Aesthetics
Unfair Competition and Trade Secrets
Collaborations, Co-Branding and Other Agreements
Italy provides comprehensive civil, criminal, and administrative remedies for IP infringement and counterfeiting.
Civil Remedies
Civil remedies are available before the Sezioni Specializzate in materia di Impresa (IP-specialised Courts), which ensure high technical expertise.
Rights' holders may seek:
Criminal Remedies
Criminal remedies are robust, particularly for counterfeiting, and are often pursued in parallel with civil actions. Key criminal provisions include:
The Italian authorities, including the Guardia di Finanza (Financial Police) and the Carabinieri (Italian paramilitary police), actively investigate counterfeiting operations, often performing “fast-track” seizures during fairs or at retail points.
Administrative Remedies
Italy’s customs enforcement is generally considered efficient, with the Guardia di Finanza and the Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli playing active roles in seizing counterfeit fashion goods at ports, airports, and postal hubs.
There are several alternative enforcement mechanisms available, as follows.
Proving IP infringement in fashion cases under Italian law involves significant evidentiary challenges.
For copyright claims, the main issue is proving originality and “creative character and artistic value” under Article 2(10) of the Italian Copyright Law. Italian courts traditionally required objective indicators such as critical recognition, museum exhibitions, or commercial success unrelated to function, although recent case law has adopted a broader approach focused on the author’s creative choices.
In trade-mark infringement cases, claimants must generally prove a likelihood of confusion or association among consumers. For well-known trade marks, protection also extends to cases involving unfair advantage, dilution, or harm to reputation, even without confusion. Demonstrating trade-mark reputation is evidence-intensive and may require market surveys, sales figures, advertising investments, and proof of public recognition.
For design infringement, the right-holder must show that the contested product creates the same overall impression on the informed user, often through expert analysis and detailed comparisons.
In unfair competition cases based on slavish imitation (imitazione servile), the claimant must prove that the copied features are distinctive rather than purely functional and that they create a real risk of consumer confusion.
The burden of proof generally lies with the claimant, although the CPI provides procedural tools such as disclosure orders under Article 121-bis of the CPI and descrizione orders under Article 129 of the CPI, allowing judicial inspection and documentation of allegedly infringing products.
Italian law provides a broad system of remedies for IP infringements designed both to compensate right-holders and to deprive infringers of their economic gains.
Compensatory Damages (Danni Patrimoniali)
Under Article 125 of the Italian Industrial Property Code (CPI) and Article 158 of the Copyright Law, damages may include:
Moral and Non-Patrimonial Damages
Corrective and Accessory Remedies
Criminal Proceedings Outcomes
Fashion advertising in Italy is mainly regulated by Legislative Decree No 145/2007 on misleading and comparative B2B advertising and by Articles 20–27 of the Consumer Code (Legislative Decree No 206/2005) governing unfair B2C commercial practices. Enforcement operates through both public authorities, especially the AGCM, and the self-regulatory system of the IAP (Istituto dell’Autodisciplina Pubblicitaria), whose Self-Regulation Code for Commercial Communication (Codice di Autodisciplina della Comunicazione Commerciale) sets key standards for fair and transparent advertising.
Comparative advertising is generally permitted under Legislative Decree No 145/2007, provided comparisons are objective and based on relevant, verifiable product features. Advertising must not create confusion with competitors, damage their reputation or discredit their products, or unfairly exploit trade marks. In the luxury and fashion sectors, where brand image is highly aspirational, comparative advertising remains relatively uncommon.
Digital and programmatic advertising adds further compliance obligations. Online campaigns must comply with the e-Privacy Directive, the General Data Protection Regulation – GDPR, and the guidelines of the Italian Data Protection Authority (Garante per la protezione dei dati personali), particularly regarding cookies, tracking technologies, behavioural targeting, and real-time bidding (RTB) systems. In addition, “dark patterns” and manipulative digital interfaces are increasingly scrutinised under the Digital Services Act (DSA) and unfair commercial practice rules. As a result, fashion brands are expected tomonitor and audit their digital advertising supply chains carefully to ensure full compliance.
Influencer marketing in Italy is now governed by a more structured regulatory framework. A key development is AGCOM Resolution No 7/23/CONS, effective since 2024, which subjects influencers with more than one million followers to broadcaster-like obligations, including stricter content and advertising rules, particularly for content directed at minors.
Transparency is the core principle of the system.
AGCM requires influencers to disclose commercial relationships clearly, through explicit hashtags such as #ad, #sponsored, or #pubblicità. In parallel, the IAP Digital Chart (updated in 2023) mandates clear labelling of sponsored content with expressions such as “post sponsorizzato.” Liability does not rest solely on influencers: brands may also be held jointly responsible for failures to comply with disclosure obligations.
The rise of virtual influencers and AI-generated promotional content has created new regulatory challenges. Although current AGCOM and IAP rules were mainly designed for human influencers, the same principles of advertising transparency apply to virtual entities.
The legal landscape surrounding environmental claims is undergoing a profound transformation, driven largely by Legislative Decree No 30/2026 (adopted in transposition of EU Directive 2024/825/EU).
The amended Consumer Code bans generic or offset-based environmental claims unless backed by recognised scientific methods, strict certifications, or comprehensive Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs), while mandating clear product durability and repairability disclosures. Furthermore, the upcoming EU Green Claims Directive will require independent pre-verification of all environmental marketing before publication.
The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) is aggressively enforcing anti-greenwashing measures, placing the fashion sector under intense and continuous scrutiny. The AGCM is also actively investigating the deceptive combination of “Made in Italy” branding with environmental claims in instances where production involves significant offshore components. Given this rigorous enforcement climate, it is imperative for fashion brands to conduct comprehensive, end-to-end audits of their environmental claims across all physical and digital marketing channels.
The enforcement of advertising and commercial practice regulations in Italy is based on a multi-level system combining administrative, self-regulatory, judicial, and criminal mechanisms.
The main public enforcement authority is the AGCM, which monitors misleading advertising and unfair commercial practices and may impose administrative fines of up to EUR10 million. Alongside it, the IAP Giurì (Jury) of the Istituto dell’Autodisciplina Pubblicitaria operates as a fast self-regulatory body able to issue binding orders for the immediate withdrawal of unlawful advertising campaigns.
Digital advertising and influencer content are additionally supervised by the AGCOM, which has specific competence over online communications. Consumer associations such as Codacons and Altroconsumo also play an active role, being entitled to file complaints before the AGCM and bring representative consumer actions.
The system is further reinforced by criminal law, as Article 640 of the Italian Criminal Code provides potential criminal liability for fraud in cases of particularly serious and intentionally deceptive advertising practices.
Italian law provides robust protection for personality and image rights. The right to one’s own image (diritto all’immagine) is protected under Article 10 of the Italian Civil Code and Articles 96–97 of the Italian Copyright Law (Law No 633/1941).
The key consumer rights applicable to fashion retailers in Italy are as follows.
Disputes with consumers may be resolved as follows.
Fashion brands operating in Italy must comply with the GDPR (Regulation (EU) 2016/679) and the Italian Privacy Code (Legislative Decree No 196/2003, as amended by Legislative Decree No 101/2018).
Key compliance areas for the fashion sector include:
The Italian Data Protection Authority (Garante per la Protezione dei Dati Personali, or “Garante”) has also issued guidelines and decisions on marketing, profiling, and loyalty programmes, and approved a specific code of conduct under Article 40 of the GDPR for marketing and teleselling activities.
As Italy is an EU Member State, the GDPR is directly applicable, and provides a harmonised data protection framework across the European Economic Area. The Italian Privacy Code, as well as the decisions and guidelines issued by the Garante, supplement and specify certain aspects of the GDPR at the national level.
Under Italian data protection rules and the guidelines of the Italian Data Protection Authority (Garante), marketing by e-mail or SMS generally requires prior opt-in consent. An exception applies to “soft spam,” which allows marketing of similar products to existing customers without explicit consent, provided an easy and free opt-out is always available. For cookies, behavioural advertising, and profiling activities, granular consent is required. “Cookie walls” or “pay-or-consent” mechanisms are generally prohibited, except in limited cases recognised by the Garante. Several companies have already been sanctioned for non-compliant cookie banners.
In loyalty programmes, personal data collection must remain proportionate to the processing purposes and comply with the principles of privacy by design and by default. Any profiling activity requires separate and specific consent.
For mobile applications, privacy notices must be provided during onboarding before any processing begins. Regarding children’s data, Articles 8 of the GDPR and 2-quinquies of the Italian Privacy Code require parental consent for users under 14 when information society services are offered directly to them.
Italy imposes increasingly strict limits on biometric and AI-based technologies through both EU and national legislation. In addition to the EU AI Act (Reg (EU) 2024/1689), Italian Law No 2025/132 (AI Law) reinforces the protection of personal data processed by AI systems, requiring compliance with the principles of lawfulness, fairness, and transparency, as well as clear information to individuals regarding AI-related processing and risks.
The Italian Privacy Code and guidance issued by the Italian Data Protection Authority (Garante) specifically regulate biometric data and biometric systems, such as facial recognition, access control, and attendance tracking. These uses generally require a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) and strict evaluations of necessity and proportionality.
In the fashion retail sector, technologies such as in-store facial recognition or AI-based sentiment analysis are therefore subject to stringent requirements under the GDPR, the AI Act, the Italian AI Law, and Garante guidelines. Their use is likely to be permissible only with explicit and freely given consent and must still satisfy strict proportionality and necessity standards.
Non-compliance with data protection rules in Italy may lead to significant administrative, criminal, and reputational consequences.
The Italian Privacy Code provides criminal sanctions for serious violations, including:
The Garante has actively enforced these provisions against in sectors such as digital marketing, e-commerce, and telecommunications, imposing fines ranging from thousands to millions of euros. In addition to financial sanctions, companies may suffer reputational harm and be subject to corrective orders requiring changes to their data processing practices and remedial measures.
The fashion industry raises several sector-specific competition law issues.
Selective distribution systems are widely used by luxury and fashion brands to maintain brand image and control the quality of retail presentation. Pursuant to EU and Italian competition law, selective distribution agreements are generally permissible, provided they meet the conditions set out in the case law and the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER, Regulation (EU) 2022/720).
Resale price maintenance (RPM) – ie, the imposition of minimum or fixed resale prices – is a hardcore restriction under Article 4(a) of the VBER and is prohibited. However, maximum or recommended resale prices are permitted provided they do not amount to de facto fixed or minimum prices.
Parallel imports: Agreements restricting parallel imports within the European Economic Area (EEA) – such as clauses preventing cross-border sales or partitioning territories among distributors – are treated as restrictions by object under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and constitute hardcore restrictions under Article 4(b)–(d) of the VBER.
Vertical agreements and online distribution systems in Italy are governed by the EU Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER), effective since June 2022, together with the European Commission Guidelines on Vertical Restraints. These rules are applied by the AGCM alongside Italian competition law (Law No 287/1990).
Block-exemption conditions: Under the VBER, vertical agreements benefit from block-exemption protection where both supplier and buyer hold market shares below 30%.
Hardcore restrictions: Certain restrictions are considered “hardcore” and fall outside the exemption, including:
The current VBER is more flexible regarding online distribution. Different wholesale prices or different criteria for online and offline sales are no longer automatically considered hardcore restrictions, provided they do not effectively prevent online selling.
Marketplace restrictions: Restrictions on the use of third-party online marketplaces by authorised distributors are also generally permitted and are not automatically treated as hardcore restrictions under the VBER.
Under the revised VBER, fashion and luxury brands operating selective distribution systems may prohibit authorised distributors from selling through third-party online marketplaces such as Amazon or eBay without the restriction automatically being considered a hardcore restriction. This is an important mechanism for preserving brand image and controlling the online sales environment.
However, such restrictions must be applied consistently and in compliance with competition law. In March 2026, AGCM fined a prominent Italian jewellery and watchmaking group approximately EUR26 million (Case I876) for unlawful practices within its selective distribution network. The violations included resale price restrictions, particularly limits on online discounts, and a marketplace ban applied discriminatorily, since the group itself continued selling on the same third-party platforms while prohibiting authorised distributors from doing so.
Separate investigations (Cases I879 and I880, opened in November 2025) are pending against two leading watch manufacturers, for alleged interference with the commercial policies of authorised retailers, relating to the prices displayed on online sales channels.
Italian courts have developed extensive case law on unfair competition in the fashion sector under Articles 2598–2601 of the Civil Code. Key areas include:
Alongside judicial enforcement, the AGCM has also addressed unfair commercial practices in fashion, particularly misleading claims relating to ethics and sustainability.
Under Italian law, the principle of exhaustion is expressly set out in Article 5(1) - (2) of the CPI, which provides for EEA-wide exhaustion and preserves “legitimate reasons” for the trade-mark owner to oppose further commercialisation when, in particular, the condition of the goods is changed or impaired; this sits alongside the general delineation of trade-mark rights in Article 20 of the CPI.
Fashion brands operating in Italy typically adopt one of several corporate structures, depending on their size, business model, and strategic objectives. The most common forms are:
Several legal issues require particular attention when acquiring or investing in a fashion brand in Italy.
Intangible assets are central to the value of fashion M&A transactions, and their valuation, transfer, and protection require careful legal and commercial attention.
This is an activity to be addressed to the financial advisers.
Italy does not impose sector-specific foreign investment restrictions on the fashion or retail industry. Foreign investors may freely establish, acquire, and operate fashion and retail businesses in Italy on the same terms as domestic investors. However, under Italy’s “Golden Power” legislation (Law Decree No 21/2012, converted into Law No 56/2012, and subsequently expanded by Law Decree No 105/2019 and emergency measures during and after the COVID-19 pandemic) the Italian Government has the power to impose conditions on, or block, acquisitions of companies operating in strategic sectors (eg, defence, national security, energy, transport, communications, AI, robotics, cybersecurity, and critical data infrastructure, financial infrastructure, media, food security, and health). While the fashion industry is not itself a designated strategic sector, a transaction involving a fashion company with significant operations in covered technologies (eg, AI-driven retail systems, critical data processing, or strategically relevant manufacturing) could potentially trigger Golden Power scrutiny, particularly where the acquirer is a non-EU/EEA investor. In practice, Golden Power review in the fashion sector is rare.
IP ownership and licensing are key issues in Italian corporate reorganisations, including mergers, demergers, and business transfers.
In mergers (fusione), Article 2504-bis of the Civil Code provides that the surviving or newly incorporated company automatically succeeds to all assets, liabilities, IP rights, and licensing obligations of the merging entities.
In demergers (scissione), Article 2506-bis of the Civil Code requires the demerger plan (progetto di scissione) to specify how IP rights are allocated among the beneficiary companies. Failure to allocate clearly specific IP assets may lead to ownership disputes.
In business transfers (cessione or conferimento d’azienda), IP rights connected to the transferred business pass to the acquirer, provided the transfer does not render the trade mark deceptive under Article 23 of the Italian Industrial Property Code (CPI). Trade-mark and design transfers must also be recorded with the UIBM to be enforceable against third parties.
Licensing agreements often contain change-of-control or assignment clauses requiring the licensor’s consent before licences can be transferred or continued following a corporate reorganisation.
The Italian fashion industry is subject to the general framework of employment law set out in Articles 2094–2134 of the Civil Code, the Statuto dei Lavoratori (Law No 300/1970), and sector-specific collective bargaining agreements, particularly the National Collective Bargaining Agreement (Contratto Collettivo Nazionale del Commercio – CCNL) for the Textile, Clothing and Fashion Industry and the CCNL for Commerce and Retail.
Key labour law issues include the following.
There is no dedicated Italian law for the protection of models; general employment and anti-discrimination law applies.
Italian workplace compliance obligations apply across all sectors, including fashion. Workplace safety is mainly governed by Legislative Decree No 81/2008 (Testo Unico sulla Sicurezza sul Lavoro), implementing EU occupational health and safety directives and imposing employer duties relating to risk assessment, preventive measures, employee training, health surveillance, and emergency procedures. Fashion manufacturing facilities must also comply with specific standards on machinery, chemical exposure, ergonomics, and fire prevention. Diversity and inclusion are regulated through several legal instruments. Law No 903/1977 and Legislative Decree No 198/2006 (Codice delle Pari Opportunità) prohibit gender discrimination in recruitment, pay, career progression, and working conditions. Law No 162/2021 strengthened gender pay transparency by introducing the voluntary gender equality certification (Certificazione della Parità di Genere).
Disability inclusion is governed by Law No 68/1999, requiring companies with more than 15 employees to reserve positions for persons with disabilities. Broader anti-discrimination protections based on race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, and other grounds are provided by Legislative Decree No 216/2003, implementing Directive 2000/78/EC.
Although no fashion-specific diversity legislation exists, the industry – especially advertising and casting practices – is increasingly scrutinised under these general rules.
In Italy, the classification of independent contractors and influencers depends on the distinction between subordinate employment (lavoro subordinato, Article 2094 of the Civil Code) and self-employment (lavoro autonomo, Article 2222 of the Civil Code). The key criterion is the degree of direction, control, and organisational integration exercised by the engaging party.
Where a formally self-employed relationship involves elements such as fixed working hours, integration into the client’s organisation, use of the client’s tools, or economic dependence, Italian courts may reclassify it as subordinate employment, with retroactive application of employment protections, social security contributions, and tax obligations. Italian law also recognises the intermediate category of co-ordinated and continuous collaborations (collaborazione coordinata e continuativa) (co.co.co.) under Article 409 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, under Legislative Decree No 81/2015, co.co.co. relationships in which the client organises the working methods and the activity is carried out predominantly personally are presumed to constitute subordinate employment. For influencers, classification depends on the practical nature of the relationship. Influencers acting autonomously, working with multiple clients, controlling their schedules, and assuming entrepreneurial risk are generally considered self-employed. By contrast, influencers working mainly for one brand under detailed instructions and close supervision may be reclassified as employees. In addition, regulations of the Italian Data Protection Authority (Garante) and AGCOM require transparency regarding sponsored content and the influencer’s status.
Italy is subject to increasing supply-chain transparency and due diligence obligations, driven primarily by EU legislation. At the national level, Article 603-bis of the Criminal Code (introduced by Law No 199/2016) criminalises labour exploitation and illegal intermediation of labour (caporalato), targeting both the direct exploiters and the employers who knowingly benefit from exploited labour. This provision is particularly relevant to the fashion supply chain, where subcontracting in textile and garment manufacturing has been associated with instances of labour exploitation, particularly in certain manufacturing districts. Italian law also provides for the administrative liability of legal entities (Legislative Decree No 231/2001) for certain criminal offences committed in the interest or to the advantage of the company, including labour-exploitation offences. Companies may be held liable unless they have adopted and effectively implemented adequate compliance programmes (Modelli di Organizzazione, Gestione e Controllo, or “231 Models”).
The main tax considerations for fashion brands are as follows.
The following regimes and incentives apply to the creative industries, R&D and sustainable production.
Royalties, licensing fees and brand-use payments are taxed as follows.
Withholding (WHT) tax applies as follows.
Under the guidelines issued by the AGCOM in July 2025, influencers fall within the regulatory perimeter if they have at least 500,000 followers on a single platform or reach at least one million average monthly views.
Digital services and influencer revenues are subject to Italian tax in accordance with general tax principles.
For tax purposes, the classification of independent contractors and influencers in Italy follows the general principles of Italian tax law.
Italy is subject to a growing body of legislation addressing sustainability, recycling, and circular fashion, largely driven by EU law. At the national level, the Environmental Code (Codice dell’Ambiente, Legislative Decree No 152/2006) provides the general framework for waste management, pollution prevention, and environmental protection. Textile waste is classified as waste under this Code, and its management must comply with the waste hierarchy (prevention, reuse, recycling, recovery, disposal). Italy has implemented Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes for several product categories, and the EU is in the process of introducing mandatory EPR schemes for textiles through revisions to the Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC, as amended by Directive (EU) 2025/1892).
Italian fashion companies are increasingly subject to mandatory ESG and carbon-reporting obligations, primarily driven by EU legislation. By way of example, under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD, Directive (EU) 2022/2464), transposed in Italy by Legislative Decree No 125/2024, large companies and listed Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) must report on environmental, social, and governance matters in accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) adopted by the European Commission.
In addition, Italy participates in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) – the relevant national framework currently being the legislative decree 47/2020 (recently amended by legislative decree 147/2024) – although this is primarily relevant to energy-intensive manufacturing in general, rather than to fashion-specific operations.
Greenwashing in Italy is regulated through consumer protection law, advertising self-regulation, and recent EU-inspired legislation.
The Italian Competition Authority, AGCM, enforces Articles 20–23 and 27 of the Consumer Code (Legislative Decree No 206/2005) against misleading environmental and sustainability claims. It may investigate unfair commercial practices, order the cessation of misleading conduct, impose interim measures, require corrective statements, and issue fines of up to EUR10 million per infringement. The AGCM has already pursued several cases involving vague or unsubstantiated sustainability claims, including in the fashion sector.
Under the Istituto dell'Autodisciplina Pubblicitaria (IAP) Code of Self-Regulation (Codice di Autodisciplina della Comunicazione Commerciale), Article 12 requires environmental marketing claims to be truthful, relevant, and scientifically verifiable. Consumer-facing claims should therefore avoid generic environmental labels unless linked to recognised certification schemes or public standards, such as the EU Ecolabel (Regulation (EC) No 66/2010), Made Green Italy (Law No 221/2015), or ISO certifications, including ISO 14025 and ISO 14040. The IAP’s Giurì has also issued several decisions concerning environmental advertising claims.
Legislative Decree No 30/2026, implementing the EU Green Claims Directive (Directive 2024/825), further strengthened the framework by:
Italy provides a growing range of incentives supporting eco-design, sustainable materials, and circular-economy initiatives in the fashion sector, while environmental penalties are mainly linked to EU and national environmental rules.
On the incentive side:
Patent Box: this regime allows a 110% super-deduction for R&D expenses connected to qualifying IP such as patents, protected designs, and copyrighted software. Sustainable fashion innovations – including eco-materials, low-impact dyeing, and circular technologies – may benefit where linked to eligible IP assets.
On the penalty side, the Italian Environmental Code (Legislative Decree No 152/2006) provides administrative and criminal penalties for environmental breaches, including unlawful emissions, wastewater discharges, pollution, and improper waste management affecting fashion production activities.
Italy’s textile manufacturing sector faces several significant environmental challenges.
Fashion-related disputes in Italy are resolved through different forums depending on the nature of the rights involved, the parties, and the remedies sought.
Arbitration is commonly used in fashion contracts, particularly in international licensing, franchising, distribution, supply, and joint-venture agreements. It is preferred in cross-border transactions for reasons of confidentiality, neutrality, procedural flexibility, sector-specific expertise, and the enforceability of arbitral awards under the New York Convention framework.
In Italy, litigation duration depends on the court and complexity of the dispute. Proceedings before the specialised Business Courts (Sezioni specializzate in materia di impresa) in IP and unfair competition matters generally last two to four years at first instance, with appeals before the Corte d’Appello adding two to three years and proceedings before the Corte di Cassazione a further two to four years. The Cartabia reform (Legislative Decree No 149/2022) seeks to reduce civil litigation timeframes.
A major strength of the Italian system, especially in fashion and luxury disputes, is the availability of rapid interim relief measures, including:
Final remedies may include damages, market withdrawal and destruction of infringing products, publication of the judgment, and permanent injunctions. These interim measures are often granted within days or weeks and are particularly effective in the fashion and luxury sectors, where speed, exclusivity, and brand protection are critical.
Italy is generally regarded as an enforcement-friendly jurisdiction for both foreign judgments and arbitral awards.
Notable precedents and case law-shaping jurisprudence relating to fashion include the following.
Chiomenti
Via Giuseppe Verdi 4
20121 Milano
Italy
+39 02 72157 1
simone.delagatinais@chiomenti.net www.chiomenti.net
Italy’s fashion sector is the world’s second-largest by export value and is home to a disproportionate share of global luxury production. It is currently facing one of the most demanding compliance environments in recent history.
Sustainability mandates, the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence, and renewed attention to “Made in Italy” industrial policy are reshaping market conduct and compliance. This article surveys the key legal trends shaping Italian fashion law in 2026, highlighting where national rules and enforcement practice create distinctive risks and opportunities.
Sustainability Regulation in Italy: From Voluntary to Mandatory
The era of voluntary sustainability pledges in fashion is drawing to a close as legislators across major markets move decisively towards binding obligations, fundamentally altering the compliance burden on fashion brands, manufacturers and retailers.
In the European Union, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) has entered phased implementation, requiring large fashion companies to identify, prevent and mitigate adverse human rights and environmental impacts throughout their value chains. For operators in Italy, this will mandate the integration of enforceable sustainability standards into supply contracts and evidence of active monitoring, not mere reliance on certifications. Italian groups should map overlaps with organisational and management models under Legislative Decree 231/2001 to align due diligence governance with corporate liability controls.
The EU’s Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) is reshaping product development. Fashion items placed on the EU market will progressively need to meet minimum durability, repairability and recyclability standards. Digital Product Passports (DPPs) for textiles will require granular information on composition, origin and environmental footprint. Italian brands should plan DPP data architecture in tandem with traceability projects already used for “Made in Italy” disclosures under Law No 206/2023, which promotes and protects Italian manufacturing and craftsmanship.
At a national level, Italy is coupling EU obligations with targeted industrial policy. The “Made in Italy” Law establishes funding and measures to support the green and digital transition of the textile/fashion/accessories supply chain (Article 11), implemented by an 8 August 2024 interministerial decree with a dedicated application window managed by Invitalia (the national agency for the country’s growth, wholly owned by the Ministry of Economy and Finance). Brands operating in Italy should therefore treat sustainability compliance and public funding opportunities as part of the same roadmap.
More specifically, the law operates on three levels that fashion businesses should map in detail.
Greenwashing Enforcement in Italy: From Guidance to Penalties
Greenwashing has moved from a reputational concern to a significant source of legal exposure in Italy. In its role as consumer protection enforcer, the Italian Antitrust Authority (AGCM) is actively targeting misleading environmental claims in fashion and retail.
At the EU level, the regulatory framework on environmental claims has been significantly reinforced by Directive (EU) 2024/825 (the “Empowering Consumers Directive”), which tightens restrictions on the use of generic or unsubstantiated environmental claims through amendments to the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. The Empowering Consumers Directive has been implemented in Italy by Legislative Decree 30/2026, which amends the Italian Consumer Code and strengthens the domestic regime on unfair commercial practices by introducing a more stringent set of rules targeting environmental claims.
In this context, fashion brands using broad claims such as “eco‑friendly” or “sustainable” without providing rigorous evidence face material and increasing risk of regulatory scrutiny, fines and corrective measures.
Recent AGCM practice underscores the growing enforcement risk in this area. In August 2025, the Authority fined a major global fast fashion retailer EUR1 million for its misleading communication strategy regarding the characteristics and environmental impact of its clothing products. In finding the unfairness of the retailer’s conduct, the Authority placed particular emphasis on the company’s heightened duty of diligence, noting that the sector to which it belongs and the business practices through which it operates – commonly associated with so-called “disposable fashion” (fast and ultra-fast fashion) – is inherently highly polluting.
More broadly, the AGCM has scrutinised sustainability claims across a range of sectors, signalling an assertive stance on environmental marketing in consumer‑facing industries.
The practical implications for fashion businesses operating in Italy are significant:
Artificial Intelligence in Italian Fashion: IP, Compliance and Liability
Artificial intelligence has become deeply embedded in the fashion value chain, from trend forecasting and generative design tools to personalised marketing and automated customer service. The legal questions surrounding AI in fashion have matured considerably in 2026, moving beyond theoretical debate into practical disputes and regulatory action.
The EU AI Act’s risk‑based regime applies directly in Italy as it is an EU Regulation, meaning it does not require national transposition, although Italy has also enacted Law No 132/2025 (Disposizioni e deleghe al Governo in materia di intelligenza artificiale). Most fashion uses will be “limited” or “minimal” risk, but AI‑driven recruitment tools, biometric categorisation in stores and some safety‑related systems may trigger higher‑tier obligations, including technical documentation, transparency measures and, where applicable, conformity assessments. Italian regulators are also scrutinising AI‑related consumer practices; brands should align AI governance with consumer protection and data protection expectations.
A pressing intellectual property question concerns the protectability and ownership of AI‑assisted designs and the defensive strategies against unauthorised use of proprietary works for AI training. Under Italian law, protection turns on human creativity and originality; the Italian Copyright Law (Law No 633/1941) and the Industrial Property Code (Codice della Proprietà Industriale, or CPI – Legislative Decree No 30/2005) require a discernible human creative contribution, and purely autonomous outputs are currently excluded from copyright protection. However, this means that, where the human contribution is sufficiently substantial – for instance, through the selection, arrangement and creative refinement of AI-generated elements, or through the formulation of detailed and original prompts that meaningfully shape the final output – the resulting work may nonetheless qualify for copyright protection under Italian law if it bears the imprint of the author’s intellectual creativity as required by Articles 1 and 2 of the Italian Copyright Law.
Italy’s “Made in Italy” Law adds a further layer here: it establishes a national registry of works by “digital creators” (defined as artists developing original works with high digital content) within the existing public register of protected works under Article 103 of the Italian Copyright Law. While the registry’s practical scope and its interaction with AI-assisted creative outputs are yet to be tested by courts and the competent authority, fashion brands working at the intersection of digital design and generative AI tooling should monitor its development as a potential mechanism for establishing authorship and prior creation, particularly when documenting the human creative contribution required to secure IP protection.
Fashion brands using generative AI tools in Italy should consider the following:
Supply Chain Transparency and Human Rights Due Diligence in Italy
Fashion supply chains remain among the most complex of any global industry. Regulatory expectations around transparency and human rights due diligence have intensified markedly.
Italy does not have a standalone “modern slavery” statute, but human rights and labour law due diligence is increasingly mandated via EU legislation and enforced through existing Italian frameworks. Companies should prepare for CSDDD alignment and leverage D.Lgs. 231/2001 organisational models to integrate human rights and environmental risk controls, supplier audits and remediation protocols into compliance programmes.
Fashion businesses with complex, multi‑tier supply chains must invest in mapping beyond Tier 1 into mills, dye houses and raw material producers, and must evidence remediation – not only termination – when adverse impacts are identified.
Against this background, it is also worth noting that the AGCM, in August 2025, fined a major Italian fashion group a total of EUR3.5 million for misleading commercial practices, finding that their public commitments to ethical and social responsibility were inconsistent with actual working conditions in their supply chain.
For fashion businesses operating from or into Italy, the key compliance challenges include:
Digital Fashion
The market for digital fashion (eg, virtual garments, avatar wearables and NFT-linked fashion items) has continued to develop, albeit with greater commercial pragmatism than was evident in the initial speculative phase. The legal frameworks governing these assets have matured correspondingly.
The classification of digital fashion items raises important questions across multiple areas of law. From an intellectual property perspective, the creation of a virtual replica of a physical garment may constitute an infringement of the original design right, trade mark or copyright, depending on the jurisdiction and the degree of similarity. Several trade mark disputes involving luxury brands and virtual world developers have provided early judicial guidance, broadly confirming that trade mark protection extends to virtual goods where there is a likelihood of confusion or association with the registered trade mark, particularly following the formal integration of virtual goods and NFTs into Class 9 of the Nice Classification and the subsequent EUIPO examination guidelines.
Consequently, brand owners must proactively audit and broaden their trade mark portfolios to cover digital iterations of their core assets, while monitoring the metaverse for unauthorised digital twins.
Consumer protection obligations apply to the sale of digital fashion items. Purchasers must receive clear pre-contractual information regarding what they are acquiring, including any limitations on use, transferability or interoperability across platforms. The characterisation of digital fashion purchases – whether as sales of goods, licences or services – has direct implications for consumer remedies in the event of defects or platform closure.
Trade Marks, Design Rights and Brand Protection in Italy
The core intellectual property challenges facing fashion businesses have evolved but not diminished. Counterfeiting remains a pervasive problem, increasingly facilitated by online marketplaces and social media platforms.
The EU Digital Services Act (DSA) introduces duties for online platforms to act against illegal content, including listings for counterfeit goods, and gives rights-holders enhanced notice‑and‑action mechanisms. Italian rights-holders should update platform enforcement playbooks and co-ordinate with marketplace operators accordingly, bearing in mind the supervisory role assumed by the Italian Communications Regulatory Authority (AGCOM) at the national level.
In Italy and the EU, the registration of non‑traditional trade marks (colours, patterns, shapes) continues to face high distinctiveness thresholds. Applicants must show that the relevant public perceives the sign as an indicator of origin rather than mere ornamentation. Brands should plan early evidence‑gathering for acquired distinctiveness and consider parallel design filings taking full advantage of the modernised framework introduced by the EU Design Legislative Package, which explicitly accommodates digital designs and 3D printing, and broadens the protection of complex product features.
Italian policy has also shifted with the 2023 “Made in Italy” Law, which aims to valorise Italian creativity and craftsmanship, and strengthens anti‑counterfeiting initiatives and sectoral support programmes. Brands should monitor funding calls and consider how authenticity and traceability tools (such as blockchain-backed registries) can complement traditional trade mark and design enforcement.
Two provisions of the law deserve particular attention from fashion IP practitioners. Article 7 introduces a pre-notification obligation for owners of trade marks registered (or demonstrably used) for at least 50 years who intend to cease trading permanently: the Ministry of Enterprises and Made in Italy (MIMIT) must be notified in advance and may, where it identifies a national interest, acquire the mark gratuitously to preserve its continuity. For marks unused for at least five years, MIMIT may independently file a registration application with a view to licensing to inward investors. This mechanism has direct implications for M&A structuring, succession planning and wind-down strategies for any Italian fashion house carrying a legacy mark, and counsel advising on such transactions should factor in the notification requirement at the earliest stage.
On anti-counterfeiting, the law tightens administrative sanctions for the purchase and importation of counterfeit goods, amends criminal provisions on the sale of industrial products with misleading signs, and promotes specialist training for justice operators, with tools that rights-holders should integrate into their broader enforcement playbooks alongside DSA notice and action mechanisms.
Data Protection and Personalisation in Italy
Fashion retail has become intensely data-driven. Personalised marketing, loyalty programmes, AI-powered size recommendations and in-store behavioural analytics all depend on the collection and processing of personal data, frequently including special category data where biometric measurements are involved.
The EU/Italian GDPR framework imposes strict requirements on lawful bases, minimisation and transparency. Legitimate interests remain available for certain direct marketing activities subject to a careful balancing test, but consent is typically required for cookie‑based tracking and advanced profiling in loyalty ecosystems.
The increasing use of biometric technologies and in‑store tracking raises acute concerns in Italy. The Garante per la protezione dei dati personali has shown a robust enforcement approach to retail and platform use of personal data, sanctioning loyalty programme mismanagement by several prominent fashion and retail operators, and intensifying scrutiny of automated decision‑making and geolocation in the platform economy. For worker‑facing tools, decisions against Foodinho/Glovo highlight expectations on algorithmic transparency and biometric/geo‑tracking limits.
Cross‑border transfers remain a live issue for Italian fashion groups, which should rely on EU mechanisms (including adequacy and the Data Privacy Framework, where applicable) and maintain Transfer Impact Assessments. Retailers should also refresh cookie and SDK consent designs following evolving enforcement practice, and keep records of profiling assessments for loyalty programmes.
Employment and Platform Work in Italy’s Fashion Ecosystem
The fashion industry’s workforce spans a broad spectrum, from highly paid creative directors to garment workers at the lower end of the value chain. Employment law developments in 2026 are affecting fashion businesses across this range.
Italian fashion businesses rely extensively on freelancers and platform‑mediated services, from creative talent to last‑mile logistics. Engagement models must reflect the legal reality of control and integration, including collective bargaining and social security implications. Recent Garante decisions on platform workers also intersect with employment compliance by constraining opaque algorithmic management and off‑hours geolocation (see Foodinho/Glovo decisions cited above).
Diversity, equity and inclusion remain central for Italian fashion houses, driven by EU anti‑discrimination law and investor expectations. Many larger employers are also preparing for sustainability reporting that captures workforce metrics, requiring better data quality and governance across HR systems.
The gig‑economy model in logistics and last‑mile delivery continues to attract regulatory attention in Italy. E‑commerce players that rely on riders and couriers should monitor developments on platform work at EU and national level and ensure that contractual frameworks, health and safety measures and algorithmic transparency standards are met.
Looking Ahead for Italy
The Italian regulatory environment in 2026 is defined by convergence and acceleration. Sustainability, technology and human rights obligations are no longer siloed: CSDDD phased implementation is already placing due diligence obligations on the largest Italian groups, with mid-tier companies entering scope progressively through 2027–2028.
At the same time, the AGCM has shown an increasingly strong focus on greenwashing enforcement, indicating that close scrutiny of environmental and sustainability claims will remain a key priority in the near future.
In parallel, ESPR-delegated acts on textiles are expected to enter force in the near term, triggering the first concrete DPP implementation deadlines.
Against this backdrop, brands that treat compliance as a strategic lever rather than a cost centre – using “Made in Italy” funding instruments to finance traceability infrastructure that simultaneously serves regulatory and commercial purposes – will be best placed to absorb the compliance wave.
Practically, this means:
The intersection of creativity, “Made in Italy” identity and regulatory compliance is demanding, but firms that navigate it well stand to consolidate competitive advantage precisely where market entrants find the barriers highest.
Via Giuseppe Verdi 4
20121
Milano
Italy
+39 02 72157 1
patrizia.ammirati@chiomenti.net www.chiomenti.net