Turkey has adopted a number of regulations to combat online counterfeiting and determine internet service provider responsibilities. However, the current system is inconsistent due to the different interpretations of whether counterfeiting falls within the scope of Article 9 of the Internet Law.
A design is accepted as having individual character if its overall impression could be distinguished by a so-called 'informed user' from a prior design made available to the public. Therefore, if the informed user considers the overall impression of a new design to be different from a design previously made available to the public, the latter design will be considered eligible for protection.
The Constitutional Court recently handed down an important decision regarding freedom of speech and unfair competition claims following the use of a company's trademark in an online domain name. This decision shows how the court handles cases in which fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and IP rights compete, especially in the service industry sector.
The physical appearance, name, expressions used and other distinctive components relating to or associated with copyrighted works or characters may enjoy trademark protection in Turkey irrespective of whether they are registered there. The aim of this approach is to prevent third parties from profiting from infringing trademarks.
The Supreme Court recently issued a decision regarding non-use cancellation actions and the retroactive enforcement of Article 9 of the Industrial Property Code (IP Code). The decision has clarified the longstanding debate and unpredictability concerning the implementation of the IP Code's non-use provision. The courts will now implement Article 9 against non-used trademarks without hesitation.