Insights
Discovery of Evidence Requests and the Scope of Bolar Exemption
Discovery of evidence requests are specially regulated under the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100. The discovery of evidence enables determining a fact that is not yet examined in an ongoing action or a fact that will be put forward in a future action. It must be emphasised that, unlike the US and UK systems, there is no full and frank disclosure procedure under Turkish civil law. In other words, the parties may decide, at their discretion, which documents they will… »
Impact of EPO Proceedings and EPC Provisions on National Actions
Since Turkey’s inclusion as a member of the EPC, a hot topic has been the enforcement or invalidity of Turkish validation of European Patent(s) (“EP”) while proceedings before the European Patent Office (the “EPO”) are pending. Once an EP is validated in Turkey, it becomes a national patent. For EPs, the Office seems to have transferred its powers and duties to the European Patent Office; therefore, it functions as an institution that carries out only some procedural… »
Assessment of Individual Character of a Design in Turkey
A recent case clarifies the role of the informed user and freedom of choice in Turkish design law. Mutlu Yıldırım Köse and İrem Girenes Yücesoy explain. Design law enables designers to protect the appearance of a product. According to the Turkish Industrial Property Code (IP Code), to obtain design protection, a design must be new and have individual character. In order to consider whether the design has individual character, the overall impression produced by it on the… »
Notice and Takedown Procedure for Copyright Protection
Copyrights are amongst the most infringed-upon rights in the internet environment. On this account, Turkey applies a notice and takedown system in online copyright infringement cases as a practical tool, which is also widely recognized in many jurisdictions around the globe. In Turkey, copyrights are protected under Law on Literary and Artistic Works No. 5846 (“Law No. 5846”). According to Law No. 5846, if a work is adapted, duplicated and circulated, performed or broadcast… »
Artificial Intelligence and Copyright
Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is defined as “The ability of a digital computer or computer-controlled robot to perform tasks commonly associated with intelligent beings.” With the advancement of technology, AI systems have learned to create music and art and, furthermore, today, AI can write poems, novels, stories, and legal articles. As a result of these developments, discussions have begun regarding AI-created works of art, as well as the notion of ownership and… »
Ownership of the Works Created by the Employee
Pursuant to Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works (“LIAW”), the owner of the work, in principle, is the person who creates the work, and this person is the exclusive owner of the material and moral rights arising from the creation of the work. According to the LIAW, although material rights may be waived by the author or transferred to third parties, the transfer of moral rights, or waiver of these rights, are not possible in accordance with the mandatory… »
A Brief Review of the Karalis Case
Mr. Yannis Karalis (“Plaintiff”), a Greek composer and lyrist who is the copyright owner of the “Eclipse” song, which was released in 1997, brought an infringement action against the famous Turkish singer and lyrist, Ms. Sezen Aksu, as well as against other lyrists and several music record and production companies (“Defendants”) due to their infringing use of the cited song in 2003. The Musical Work Owner’s Society of Turkey (“MESAM”) was also informed and involved in the… »
The Effect of the Pandemic on Trademark Applications
2020 was a difficult year for businesses as humanity started to live through the first global disaster of the millennium, the Covid-19 pandemic. Just as the fluctuations in the economy and our changing work and lifestyles due to long months spent at homes destroyed our understanding of “normal.” As a result, business mentality, preferences and actions taken during the crisis have all changed. Although it is inevitable for trademark filings to be affected by these changes, the… »
Effects of Covid-19 on Brand Enforcement in Turkey
Turkey’s first official diagnosis of COVID-19 was announced on March 11, 2020. Since then, the country has experienced lockdowns, quarantines, travel bans and limited access to public services at various levels. There were months where the legal and administrative bodies’ effectiveness was inversely proportional with the curve of pandemic. Incidentally, brand enforcement activities were also heavily affected, especially during the second and third quarters of 2020. However… »
Boundaries of the Supervisory Power Granted to the Court of Cassation
When we take a closer look at the history of the Turkish judiciary system, the Court of Cassation has been an institution existing under different names and with different powers since 1868, and it serves as the supreme court of our judicial justice system. The Court of Cassation has taken the current position and duties together with the establishment of regional courts of justice, and the adoption of the triple justice system. Prior to the establishment of regional courts… »
Well-known Trademark Registry Is Again Open for Debate
In a recent decision that challenged long-standing precedents, the Court of Cassation has concluded that the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (the Office) has no authority to create and maintain a registry for recording well-known trademarks. The background of the case relies upon the fact that the plaintiff’s application to have its trademark recorded as well-known was rejected by the Office’s Re-examination and Evaluation Board (the Board). The plaintiff filed a… »
Enforcement of the Foreign Court Decisions Related to IP Rights in Turkey
In principle, a court order rendered in one country has its legal effects and consequences only within the same country. For a foreign court decision to create legal effects and consequences, in Turkey, this decision needs to be legally recognized and/or enforced by Turkish courts. Regulations regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign court decisions are stipulated between Articles 50 and 59 of the International Private and Civil Procedure Code (“IPCPC”), numbered… »