74 WINE LAW Regarding the sanctions, there are two different sets of rules against infringement: criminal sanctions and civil sanctions. The main difference is that the former aim to protect the strong public interest, which, in the case of sanctions against infringement, is constituted by the public faith and by the public economy. Indeed, all sanctions against infringement are included in the Italian Criminal Code section dedicated to the crimes against public faith and public economy. However, the structure of rules against infringement of DOs and GIs partially differs from those against the infringement of trademarks and other distinctive signs. In the case of DOs and GIs, the relevant provisions also take into account the interest of the original producers as the signs’ unique users, in consideration of the strict geographical, qualitative and productive requirements included in the government of use. Similarly, civil sanctions are aimed at protecting not only the public interest of consumers against any risk of deception and confusion but also the prominent interest of the owners of the infringed Designations of Origin and Geographical Indications. The combined application of the different rules allows for adequate protection of DOs and GIs in favour of consumers and entrepreneurs. Analysing criminal sanctions, the main provision is article 517-quater of Italian Criminal Code, introduced in 2009, which sanctions the infringement or alteration of GIs and DOs, as well as the introduction into the national territory of the infringed goods, with the imprisonment up to two years and with a fine up to 20,000 €. This provision seems to be more effective than article 517, which sanctions the unlawful behaviour, consisting in the offer on the sale of products bearing signs and possibly deceive consumers on the geographical origin or quality of the goods, since, in the case of GIs and DOs, it is not required a concrete risk of confusion among consumers. The fact that the risk of confusion is not required further confirms that this rule is mainly aimed at protecting the interests of DOs and GIs’ producers, more than the trust of consumers, as it happens for other criminal rules against trademarks and other distinctive signs’ infringement, as said above. This element has been recently highlighted by the Italian Supreme Court, with its ruling no. 12270, of 20 March 2019, in a case of an alleged infringement of a designation of origin in the wine sector. The concrete application of article 517-quater appears to be rather strict. In this sense, it is worth mentioning that the Court of Asti, with its recent ruling of 8 May 2019, has condemned a producer who used the Barolo DOCG without respecting the rules foreseen by the government of use to the imprisonment of six months and with a fine of 6,000 € (although with a suspended sentence). The violation of the government of use came from some winemaking operations,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==