Turkey: Trade mark prosecution and opposition under the new IP Code
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Turkey: Trade mark prosecution and opposition under the new IP Code

The New Turkish Industrial Property Code entered into force on January 10 2017. The IP Code replaces the Decree-laws pertaining to the protection of trade marks, patents, geographical indications and designs by unifying them into a single code.

Among other reforms, the trade mark chapter includes changes relating to prosecution and opposition procedures for trade marks. These are now in greater compliance with the relevant European Union directives.

First, the graphical representation criteria for signs to be registered as a trade mark has changed to "signs capable of being represented on the register in a manner which enables the competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to its proprietor". Further, "colours" and "sounds" have been explicitly stated under "signs" that can be registered as a "trade mark" for the first time. In addition, it has been explicitly stated that the signs that are not distinctive and which include geographical indications cannot be registered. Those were already accepted under the former legislation through interpretation but now they are clearly mentioned in the IP Code.

One of the major changes in trade mark prosecution is that the IP Code introduces the principle of co-existence into Turkish trade mark law. Accordingly, letters of consent from the senior trade mark/trade mark application owners will be acceptable in overcoming the citations of earlier senior identical or indistinguishably similar trade marks by the Turkish Patent and Trade Mark Office as an ex officio refusal ground.

The IP Code includes major changes relating to the opposition proceedings as well. First, the term for opposition for trade marks has been shortened to two months from three months. Further, during the opposition proceedings before the Office opponents will have to prove genuine use or produce justified reasons for non-use of their trade marks within the last five years that they cite as grounds for the opposition, if so requested by the applicant. Accordingly, if the opponent cannot prove genuine use or produce justified reasons for non-use, the opposition will be rejected.

There are also changes relating to opposition grounds. The protection of well-known trade marks in the meaning of Paris Convention, which was recently cancelled by the Constitutional Court, has been re-introduced as a relative opposition ground.

Finally, it is worth noting that for trade mark applications that were filed before January 10 2017, the former legislation, namely the Trademark Decree-Law, will still apply until their registration processes complete.

Uğur Aktekin

Mutlu Yıldırım Köse

Gün + Partners

Kore Şehitleri Cad. 17

Zincirlikuyu 34394

İstanbul, Turkey

Tel: + (90) (212) 354 00 00

Fax: + (90) (212) 274 20 95

gun@gun.av.tr

gun.av.tr

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Anna Sosis discusses the importance of IP education and explains why, away from IP, she could see herself becoming a mindfulness teacher
Cross-border judicial collaboration and EU copyright were hot topics on the second day of the EUIPO’s 5th IP Case Law Conference
Nancy Linck, who is 82, explains why she found something new to excite her at Carmichael IP
On day one of the EUIPO’s Case Law Conference, delegates heard why single-letter trademarks are weak and received an update on the EU’s design law shakeup
High-earning businesses place most value on the depth of the external legal teams advising them, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
Kilpatrick Townsend was recognised as Americas firm of the year, while patent powerhouse James Haley won a lifetime achievement award
Partners at Foley Hoag and Kilburn & Strode explore how US and UK courts have addressed questions of AI and inventorship
In-house lawyers have considerable influence over law firms’ actions, so they must use that power to push their external advisers to adopt sustainable practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Counsel say they’re advising clients to keep a close eye on confidentiality agreements after the FTC voted to ban non-competes
Gift this article