Guarding the Games: “Ambush Marketing” and the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic Games
The opening of the 25th edition of the Winter Olympic Games, also known as “Milano Cortina 2026”, is fast approaching. The Olympic Games will begin on 4 February 2026, when the first curling competitions will take place in Cortina, while the opening ceremony will be held two days later, on 6 February, at the San Siro Stadium in Milan.
From a legal perspective, an event of such magnitude provides a timely opportunity to reflect on unlawful advertising initiatives. In this article, we explore how certain unlawful advertising initiatives are treated under Italian law.
What is “ambush marketing”?
It is well known that, during major sporting events, it is common practice for companies and organisers to enter into sponsorship agreements aimed at promoting the sponsor's image, trademarks and products by associating them with the sponsored event.
However, alongside these legitimate initiatives, unlawful promotional practices have become established over time, the spread of which has increased significantly over the years. Among these practices is so-called “ambush marketing”, which consists in the unauthorised association of a company's image, trademarks or products with an event of great media resonance, with the aim to gain a promotional advantage from doing so. More specifically, this practice is characterised by the absence of sponsorship agreements, licences or authorisations from the event organiser and, consequently, by the avoidance of any related economic costs, with potential damage to the organisers and competing companies, as well as to consumers, who are led to believe erroneously that the author of the promotional initiative is one of the official sponsors of the event.
How is “ambush marketing” treated under Italian legislation?
In the Italian legal system, “ambush marketing” was first recognised in Law no. 167 of 17 August 2005, containing “Measures for the protection of the Olympic symbol in relation to the Winter Games «Torino 2006»”. Subsequently, the phenomenon was regulated in a more comprehensive manner by Decree Law no. 16 of 11 March 2020 (the “Decree”), as amended by Law no. 31 of 8 May 2020, containing “Urgent provisions for the organisation and staging of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games and the ATP Finals Torino 2021-2025, as well as the prohibition of parasitic activities”.
In particular, the first paragraph of article 10 of the Decree provides for the prohibition of “parasitic, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading advertising and marketing activities carried out in relation to the organisation of sporting or trade fair events of national or international importance not authorised by the organisers and intended to obtain an economic or competitive advantage”.
The second paragraph of the same article then identifies parasitic advertising and marketing activities, which are therefore prohibited under the previous paragraph, as follows:
- “the creation of a link, even indirect, between a trademark or other distinctive sign and one of the events referred to in paragraph 1, which is likely to mislead the public as to the identity of the official sponsors;
- the false representation or declaration in one's advertising of being an official sponsor of an event referred to in paragraph 1;
- the promotion of one's own trademark or other distinctive sign through any action, not authorised by the organiser, that is likely to attract the attention of the public, carried out during one of the events referred to in paragraph 1, and likely to give the public the false impression that the author of the conduct is a sponsor of the sporting or trade fair event itself;
- the sale and advertising of products or services unlawfully marked, even if only in part, with the logo of a sporting event or trade fair referred to in paragraph 1 or with other distinctive signs likely to mislead the public about the logo itself and to create the erroneous perception of any connection with the event or with its organiser or with the subjects authorised by the latter”.
With regard to the temporal scope of application, article 11 of the Decree establishes that the prohibitions mentioned above apply from the date of registration of the official logos, brands or trademarks of the events referred to in the first paragraph of article 10 until the 180th day following the official end date of such events.
With regard to combating the conduct referred to in article 10, article 12 of the Decree gives the Competition and Market Authority (the “Competition Authority”), i.e. the independent authority responsible for the protection of free competition and consumers, the power to ascertain violations of the Decree and to impose administrative fines ranging from €100,000 to €2.5 million, without prejudice to cases in which the conduct constitutes a criminal offence or a more serious administrative infringement. Furthermore, pursuant to article 12, the Competition Authority may avail itself of the Financial Police, which can, on its own initiative, exercise its powers (conferred upon it for the assessment of taxes) during the sporting event or trade fair in order to, for example, seize anything that is produced, marketed, used or distributed in violation of the prohibitions referred to in article 10.
Finally, article 13 states that the provisions contained in the Decree do not exclude parties claiming that their rights or interests have been infringed as a result of the conduct referred to in article 10 from also relying on other statutory provisions. Indeed, the provisions of the Decree (being of purely public relevance, as they are aimed at pursuing general interests) do not prejudice the possibility of combating “ambush marketing” practices under provisions aimed at protecting specific rights and interests, other than those contained in the Decree itself. By way of example, an “ambush marketing” practice could constitute, in addition to a violation of the provisions mentioned above, a trademark infringement under the Industrial Property Code, an act of unfair competition under the Civil Code, or an unfair commercial practice under the Consumer Code.
How do the rules on “ambush marketing” apply in practice?
It is within this regulatory framework that a recent judgment (no. 3118 of 11 April 2025) fits, where the Council of State ruled on the first practical application by the Competition Authority of the rules on “ambush marketing” described above.
The case originated from a promotional activity carried out by the German company Zalando SE (“Zalando”) during the international football event “UEFA Euro 2020”. In the same square in Rome as the official event area called “Football Village”, Zalando installed a large-scale advertising billboard containing the expression “Chi sarà il vincitore?” (“Who will be the winner?”), the name Zalando, a depiction of the 24 flags of the nations participating in the event and a white football shirt bearing the company’s trademark.
Following a report by the Financial Police, the Competition Authority initiated investigative proceedings against Zalando. Having ascertained the unlawfulness of Zalando's promotional initiative (pursuant to article 10, paragraphs 1 and 2, letter a), of the Decree), as it was likely to mislead the public into believing, contrary to the truth, that Zalando was an official sponsor of the event, the Competition Authority imposed a monetary fine of €100,000 on Zalando.
Zalando appealed for the annulment of the measure before the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (first instance administrative judge), but the Court rejected the appeal (judgment no. 13478 of 30 August 2023).
Zalando then challenged the judgment before the Council of State (administrative court of second instance), which rejected the appeal, thereby confirming the first-instance judgment and, with it, the correct action of the Competition Authority.
As with the Competition Authority and the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio, the Council of State also considered Zalando's promotional initiative to be unlawful (under article 10, first and second paragraphs, letter a) of the Decree), as it was likely to create a deceptive connection with the “UEFA Euro 2020” event. This was based on several factors, such as the physical proximity of the billboard to the “Football Village”, the indication of Zalando's company name, the reproduction of the image of a white football shirt bearing the distinctive sign “Zalando”, as well as the inclusion on the billboard of the flags of the 24 countries participating in the competition, accompanied by the evocative slogan “Chi sarà il vincitore?” (“Who will be the winner?”).
Indeed, according to the Council of State, in the absence of prior authorisation, even an apparently neutral advertising campaign may be unlawful if, due to the context and the elements characterizing it (such as the presence of evocative visual elements and slogans and the placement of the advertising message), considered as a whole, it gives rise to a “framing” capable of misleading the public as to the existence of a sponsorship relationship between the author of the advertising campaign and the organiser of the event.
Furthermore, with regard to the requirement that the practice be capable of misleading the public (as provided for in article 10, second paragraph, letter a) of the Decree), the Council of State clarified that, although the configurability of a case of unlawful “ambush marketing” must always be assessed on a case-by-case basis, such assessment does not require a statistical survey of the recipients of the advertising message to verify that they have actually been misled, as it is sufficient to ascertain that, in light of the concrete characteristics of the promotional practice, it is potentially capable of misleading the public.
Finally, for the avoidance of doubt, although the rulings of the Administrative Court of Lazio and the Council of State referred to in this article are the first rulings based on the Decree, civil courts have been issuing rulings on “ambush marketing” for many years. The fundamental principle established by these decisions, which dealt with the phenomenon from a private law perspective, is that “ambush marketing” (as a deceptive practice capable of misleading the public as to the existence of sponsorship relationships, affiliation or other forms of connection with the event organizers), constitutes a multi-offence unlawful act that can be prosecuted before the civil courts, albeit based on different causes of action, by all injured parties, i.e. the event organiser, the official sponsors and the individual consumers who have been misled.
Concluding remarks
In conclusion, it is evident that the provisions of the Decree and the principles developed by civil and administrative case law outline a system of protection suitable for prosecuting “ambush marketing” conduct both (a) from a public-law perspective, aimed at safeguarding general interests such as the efficient functioning of the market (which is possible only when competition is conducted in accordance with principles of fairness) and the proper information of the public, as well as (b) from a private-law perspective, aimed at protecting the rights of individual injured parties.
Companies wishing to associate their image, trademarks and products with the Milano Cortina 2026 Olympic Games are therefore required to assess their communication strategies carefully in order to avoid initiatives which may constitute forms of commercial parasitism and, as a result, expose the companies implementing them to administrative and judicial proceedings.
In this regard, the preliminary investigation initiated in recent days following a report of the Financial Police by the Competition Authority against Harmont & Blaine S.p.A. (“Harmont & Blaine”), an Italian company operating in the clothing sector, serves as a warning. According to the Competition Authority, the company advertised a clothing line called “Cortina a Colori” and posted online and on the main social networks several advertisements in which, in combination with the “Harmont & Blaine” brand, the Olympic symbol consisting of five coloured circles was used, along with the hashtags #MilanoCortina and #MilanoCortina2026. In this way, despite not being one of the official sponsors of the Olympics, Harmont & Blaine created a direct and textual link between its brand and the Milan-Cortina 2026 Games, thus violating the prohibition on parasitic activities provided for in article 10 of the Decree.
It is too early to say what the outcome of the proceedings will be. However, the opening of the investigation into Harmont & Blaine demonstrates the rigor and efficiency with which the competent authorities intend to apply the provisions in force on “ambush marketing” Therefore, companies wishing to promote their image, brands, and products in connection with major events are called upon to plan their communication strategies with the utmost care, favouring legitimate sponsorship agreements and avoiding parasitic conducts, which could expose them not only to administrative and judicial proceedings, as mentioned above, but also to financial losses and damages to their reputation. In conclusions, compliance with the applicable regulations is not only a legal obligation but also an essential prerequisite for the credibility of promotional initiatives linked to high-profile events.
