Intellectual Property Services

Intellectual Property Services Insights: 213


Articles -
Intellectual Property Services | Trademarks and Designs || Hande Hançar Çelik, Di̇cle Doğan and Dilan Sıla Aslan

  • Owner of A-101 marks opposed registration of A10.COM in Classes 9 and 41
  • Office and IP Court found that there was a likelihood of confusion
  • Court of Appeals reversed due to high level of attention of target consumers
In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals has ruled that the level of attention of the target consumers of a trademark plays a significant role in the assessment of the likelihood of confusion. »


Articles -
Intellectual Property Services | Trademarks and Designs || Uğur Aktekin and Pınar Arıkan


Articles -
Intellectual Property Services | Trademarks and Designs || Zeynep Seda Alhas and Dilan Sıla Aslan

  • Red Bull opposed registration of figurative mark IBEX based on figurative mark RED BULL
  • Board found that there was likelihood of association/confusion
  • Opposition was upheld for goods in Class 30 and Class 32
The Re-examination and Evaluation Board of the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (TürkPatent) has found that the application for the figurative trademark IBEX was confusingly similar to the figurative trademark RED BULL and, therefore, could not be registered for beverages in Classes 30 and 32. »


Articles -
Intellectual Property Services | Trademarks and Designs || Güldeni̇z Doğan Alkan and Kübra Kaplan

  • Owner of STICK and STIX marks opposed registration of figurative mark and design containing ‘sticks’
  • IP Courts found no likelihood of confusion and that ‘stick’ is descriptive
  • Court of Appeal disagreed in somewhat unusual decision
In two recent decisions (Merit No 2016/2525, Decision No 2017/4913, dated October 2 2017; and Merit No 2016/2484, Decision No 2017/4777, dated September 27 2017), the 11th Chamber of the Court of Appeal has dismissed decisions of the first instance courts (Ankara Fourth Civil IP Court, Merit No 2014/295, Decision No 2015/47, dated March 30 2015; and Ankara First Civil IP Court, Merit No 2013/158, Decision No 2014/94, dated March 27 2014), declaring
that the words ‘stick’ and ‘stix’ were the main and most prominent elements of the plaintiff’s earlier trademarks and that they were distinctive. »


Articles -
Intellectual Property Services | Patents and Utility Models || Selin Sinem Erciyas and Ayşen Kunt


News and Events -
Intellectual Property Services | Life Sciences || GÜN + PARTNERS


News and Events -
Intellectual Property Services | Life Sciences || GÜN + PARTNERS


Articles -
Intellectual Property Services | Trademarks and Designs || Güldeni̇z Doğan Alkan and Dilan Sıla Aslan