Seneghe, "Cabudanne de sos Poetas": The Ministry clarifies, no trademark infringement.

Regarding the alleged “improper” use of the name and registered trademark of the “Cabudanne de sos Poetas” festival , a note from the Ministry of Culture, called into question by the appeal to the TAR of Sardinia by the Perda Sonadora association, clarifies what happened.

The cultural project funded by the PNRR, remodeled by the municipal administration, approved by the Ministry in November 2025, and newly assigned to Illisso di Nuoro , originally included the name Cabudanne de sos Poetas in the local PNRR project code, "attributed solely for accounting purposes, for the allocation of expenditure items in the ReGiS reporting system, dedicated to project monitoring and reporting." This prompted the Perda Sonadora association, owner of the name and registered trademark, to raise concerns about its use by the municipality, which filed an appeal with the Regional Administrative Court of Sardinia to protect the festival.

The Ministry explains: "The mere title assigned to the local project code is not even indirectly capable of infringing the appellant association's trademark, and was not previously so. The declaration also includes all the objections, as explained in the appeal, relating to the service assignment procedures in favor of the opposing party, Illisso Edizioni."

Therefore, there was no trademark infringement even in the original because: "the contents of the assignment concern a different festival than the one the appellant association was supposed to organize."
Regarding the request to annul the documents awarding the project to Illisso, subject to a precautionary suspension, he clarified: "As a result, the request for precautionary measures must be considered unfounded, as there is no basis for the request, nor any risk of default."

The legal appeal to the TAR of Perda Sonadora was therefore unnecessary, the regional court clarified: "The matter did not arise from improper conduct by the Administration, but from a simple misunderstanding by the CLP, which could have been remedied without resorting to legal protection."