As per the IP Code, trademark protection provided by this law is obtained through registration. However, although registration is necessary to protect the rights of trademark owners and to claim their rights against third parties, this may be insufficient.
Indeed, a trademark must be genuinely used in Turkey with respect to goods and services for which it is registered. However, if the trademark is not genuinely used within five years from registration, or if its use is…
»
One of the major changes brought by the IP Code that came into force on 10 January 2017 is on non-traditional marks and, especially, on color marks. Although it was also possible to register color marks prior to the change of legislation, in practice, the use of an internationally recognized color code within the application form was not possible, hence color codes were mentioned by a separate petition, and the applications were considered as “device trademarks” within the…
»
TÜRKATENT published The New Trademark Examination Guideline (“the Guideline”) on September 30, 2019. The Guideline defines the criteria regarding the examination of trademark applications on absolute grounds for refusal within the scope of the IP Code that came into force in 2017.
The Guideline updates the previous guideline that had been in force since 2011, clarify the principles of absolute grounds for refusal that are explained in the IP Code, and provides consistency in…
»
Indirect infringement is not explicitly dealt with in the Turkish IP Law. However, the legislator confers, via Article 86 of the Industrial Property Code (IPC), a right to the patent holder to prevent third parties from supplying essential elements of the invention to unauthorised people, which will eventually lead to the working of the patented invention. In order for this provision to be implemented, third parties must be aware that these elements or instruments are…
»
With the announcement dated April 10 2020, Turkish Data Protection Authority (“DPA”) determined Binding Corporate Rules as a mean to be used for the data transfer abroad based on Article 9/2 of Law on Personal Data Protection numbered 6698 (“Law”) and introduced a new tool for the highly controversial and ambiguous matter in Turkey.
By indicating in the announcement that the undertakings taken as per Article 9/2 of the Law would be usually practical for the bilateral data…
»
The Turkish Court of Appeal has overturned lower court decisions in a case concerning likelihood of confusion between trade marks sharing a common weak element. Güldeniz Doğan Alkan and Ayşenur Çıtak explain.
Origins of the dispute
Türkiye İş Bankası A.Ş., which is a popular bank and holder of the well-known trade mark Türkiye İş Bankası in Turkey, filed an application for the mark shown on the right in classes 9 and 36.
An opposition was filed against the application…
»
