Let's clarify the issue of rights...
If you are on this page, you have seen one of my images and want to check the legality and rights associated with it.

General conditions
I follow the law 100%, with no exceptions and no leniency toward myself of any kind; I apply the law correctly, and this page outlines the terms for releasing my images.
Lately, the barbarism of the internet has given rise to law firms that are on the hunt for violations of privacy and image rights; moreover, people have become quarrelsome and intolerant, so it is necessary to clearly specify where each image comes from and under which license it is released.
There are also people who file complaints in bad faith, and one must guard against them—so “travel light but with a good lawyer at your back”—and always give back what you receive.
I therefore declare that: “I do not use images that are not my own, and in the absence of a public use license, it is possible to find images with a Creative Commons license; in case of doubt, the image is simply not used.
In the event of a dispute, the competent court is Varese, and since I possess supporting documentation for every image and detail, the applicable rights can be easily verified.

Images obtained from drones
The images captured by my drones are for personal use and were taken under the following conditions:
- LICENSE - I hold an operator’s license (I am registered as an operator and have the necessary authorizations for aerial filming), and every shoot is conducted safely and in compliance with the law.
- INSURANCE - My drone flights are covered by adequate insurance commensurate with the purpose, as required by law.
- COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS - Law 2023/006 UAS - During filming, I remain well below the minimum altitude required by law, which is always verified using D-Flight; in case of doubt, I do not fly, exercising the utmost respect and caution (+VLOS: avoid flying over people, avoid even potentially risky situations, no flights in windy conditions—fly at times when the number of people who might be present is minimal or nonexistent), always filming under rules stricter than those required by law, i.e., with “excessive caution.”
- USE - Images are released only for the purpose for which they were used (in low resolution), and any other use is prohibited without prior agreement with the author; unauthorized use is not permitted.
- VISIBILITY - In compliance with European regulations, the presence of my drones in flight is indicated by broadcasting my operator ID (well ahead of European legal requirements).
- Privacy - Fully and completely respected; see the note below.

Privacy
I fully respect it, and I also want to emphasize that, since the privacy law was enacted, some people have mistakenly developed the pathetic and ridiculous belief that any “nobody” is worthy of some kind of attention, without ever taking an objective look in the mirror.
For this misguided reason, they believe that any random third party would waste their time and energy, breaking the privacy law to film them—a very pathetic illusion with no concrete basis in reality; it is utter narcissistic madness.
In fact, at least in my case, this belief is completely wrong; I have zero interest in people (I publicly declare that I have no interest in you whatsoever), so I never film “people,” and if I were to do so by mistake (even for a few seconds), you would still be deleted within a few minutes. I do not waste space on my digital media to capture strangers, and I warn you against trespassing into my footage.
The tragic truth is that no one wants to film you, since 99.999% of people have absolutely no interest in their private lives—which I respect 100%. The remaining 0.001% are people I speak to directly, and whom I logically do not film by any means (neither with a camera nor a drone).
Therefore, based on what has been stated here, any complaints regarding privacy violations would be made in bad faith, and I reserve the right to pursue legal recourse in every way permitted by the law.
“Unfounded complaints” explained briefly—From stories and personal experience, I’ve been able to form a clear picture. It can happen that a drone captures ILLEGAL acts—such as various types of legal violations, including unauthorized construction and property crimes—prompting the person being filmed to immediately file a complaint for invasion of privacy. Let’s keep this detail in mind: often, the person filing the complaint has a guilty conscience and is trying to hide THEIR own violations of the law—because they were doing something illegal and are afraid, so they try to preempt the situation by filing a complaint for invasion of privacy against an honest, law-abiding citizen.
There are also antisocial and quarrelsome people who file complaints simply because they’re allowed to—this is part of the transformation of today’s society—and who take pleasure in harming others. They are dangerous to themselves and others, mentally unstable, and hostile to a collaborative and honest society.
Furthermore, there are people who are simply afraid, and given the kind of society we now live in, I can’t say I don’t understand them; I stand in full solidarity with them—they need to be reassured.
This is how strange complaints arise—seemingly unmotivated and without substance, entirely fabricated to conceal an illegal act or the mental distress of the person being reported.
The complaint, therefore, when viewed from another perspective that reveals the reasons behind it, can transform the complainant into a subject worthy of interest in a second time.

Personal images
Personal images are for use exclusively on this site. For other uses, you must request a license unless otherwise specified in the release notes below the image.

Images from the web or other resources
Some images used are under Creative Commons, and the license for these remains unchanged; the source is always clearly specified in the release notes. For some images, I have a private license received from the author, and that's the proof...

Personal images at public events
I don’t usually take photos like this, but if various organizations request them, it’s possible that I might. Now, there’s a special provision in the privacy law regarding this type of image.
In fact, the privacy law allows for the publication of images of people in public places during events of any kind, as this activity falls under the specific provision of “exceptions to privacy.”
In short, if the event is public, if you’re not in the foreground, and if the photo was taken entirely by chance, you CANNOT object to its publication, because it’s clear that you’re not the subject of the photo.
So, theoretically, you can still object, but there’s a 99.99% chance you won’t win your case, whereas public figures cannot object to publication precisely because they are “public.”

Respect!
However, respecting everyone's rights is the best guideline for one's work, and I adhere to this.
Any errors or problems will be corrected promptly, if necessary, and linked to genuine rights.

False Claims and Fraudulent Disputes - Anyone who claims a false right commits an illicit act (from a public official abusing their power or from a private individual making a false statement), this will be challenged in the appropriate forum.
However, the act of "false claiming" rights also requires adequate compensation for the moral and economic damages suffered. This compensation (the highest possible), which I reserve the right to request in these cases, will be donated to local charities.

N.B. If you find the Creative Commons logo on the photo, "this logo takes precedence over any attribution of rights, even those specified on this page."

In summary—Today, drone footage and even simple photography are often treated as criminal offenses, sometimes justifiably (in more than a few cases), while in other instances, copyright and privacy laws make it difficult to act appropriately. However, it is possible to do so if you know the law and abide by it.
Public officials rightly point out that ignorance does not negate the rights established by law, which is why everyone must be familiar with the law; public officials are the first who must know the law in order to enforce it, so it is possible that a public official who is not properly trained may commit abuses if they are unaware of the law.
We need public officials who are well-informed and law-abiding, and in any case, I have the utmost respect for those entrusted with this service, which I firmly believe is very USEFUL. Therefore, I say YES TO INSPECTIONS—and I hope there will be many of them, given the ignorance that surrounds us.
Those who exercise their rights are not afraid of inspections, while those who break the law must rightly be guided back to proper conduct and, if necessary, sanctioned.

Updated at 06-20-2026 - For anything not covered by these release notes, Italian/EU copyright law applies.