The Karalis Case: A 20-Year Legal Odyssey
More than 20 years of copyright litigation has finally ended in favor of Yannis Karalis a Greek composer and lyricist. While the dispute has made a lot of noise with the inclusion of prominent names in the music industry among the defendants, it also draws attention to the problematic points in the judicial system in terms of the length of the trial process.
As discussed in our previous article, in the context of the relevant dispute, Yannis Karalis (the Claimant) filed an infringement action in 2003, stating that his song “Eclipse”, released in 1997, was used without authorization by the famous Turkish singer and lyricist Sezen Aksu and other lyricists and production companies (“Defendants”) within the scope of the work entitled “Adı Bende Saklı” and that such use constituted infringement of his copyright. The Musical Work Owner's Society of Türkiye (“MESAM”) was also informed and involved in the lawsuit. The claims in the lawsuit consist of the injunction against the continuing infringing acts of defendants, and also for material and moral damages in the amount of € 60.000 and € 900.000, respectively. The plaintiff additionally requested the payment of a specific amount, which is calculated as 3 times of the amount that could have been demanded if he had been granted the right by a contract, according to Article 68 of Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846 (“LIAW”).
The First Instance Court partially accepted the plaintiff’s case by ordering the payment of € 10.000 in material, and € 5.000 in moral damages. Upon the appeal of the relevant decision by both parties, the Court of Cassation (“CoC”) examined the file and reversed the decision, stating that the amount claimed under Article 68 of the LIAW was not taken into consideration and that moral damages should be determined in domestic currency in accordance with the provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 818 (“TCO”), unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
The First Instance Court complied with this reversal decision and decided “Plaintiff’s compensation claim as to Article 68 of the Law shall be accepted and 10.000 € shall be paid to compensate the plaintiff’s material damages in this direction (…) by taking into account the reversal decision it has also been decided that the defendants shall pay TRY 15.000 for the plaintiff’s moral damages since the TCO requires this payment to be made in local currency.” as a result of the retrial.
Upon the appeal of the relevant decision by the parties, the decision of the First Instance Court was upheld by the decision of the 11th Civil Chamber of the CoC numbered 2021/6063 M. 2023/1453 D. and dated March 9, 2023. With the rejection of the parties' requests for correction of the decision, the decision of the First Instance Court became final only after almost 20 years since the beginning of the dispute.
Although “infringement of copyright” has been established and compensation has been awarded as a result of the relevant proceedings, there are issues that need to be discussed in the file in terms of both the proceedings and the calculation of compensation.
In our opinion, it was not appropriate for the First Instance Court to interpret the CoC's reversal decision by including the amount of material damages within Article 68 of LIAW. As a matter of fact, these two are different from each other and are separate remedies granted to the copyright owner. Moreover, although the reversal decision states that the moral damages should be determined only in local currency, it is not clear how the court reduced the initial award of € 5.000 to TRY 15.000. The case was finalized without any of these substantive objections being resolved in the relevant legal remedy proceedings.
An individual application has been made to the Constitutional Court on behalf of the plaintiff on the grounds of violation of the right to a fair trial and violation of the right to property within the scope of infringement of intellectual property rights, taking into account the much longer than normal trial process and the existence of substantial deficiencies regarding the calculation of compensation, and the outcome of this process is awaited.
Despite the lengthy proceedings, the case is significant in terms of the determination of infringement and the award of material and moral damages against the leading actors in the music industry in Türkiye, and will encourage actors in the music industry, and especially foreign authors, to pursue their rights in Türkiye.
*Heartfelt thanks to our colleague, Att. Zeynep Berfin Ekinci, for her contributions and research in the process.
First published by in Mar 04, 2025.