Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Turkey: Patent use and compulsory licences

New IP law abolished the provisions concerning the use requirement of patents and evidence on use detailed in the Decree Law on the Protection of Patent Rights. Instead, IP law now mentions the use requirement within the provision on compulsory licences, as a consequence of non-use of a patent.

Accordingly, a patent owner must use the patented invention. When assessing the use, market conditions and conditions under the control of the patent owner, as well as outside their control, are considered. At the end of three years after publication of a patent grant in the Bulletin or at the end of four years after the patent application date, whichever expires later, any interested party can request the issue of a compulsory licence. They can make this request on the grounds that at the date of demand for a compulsory licence the patented invention is not being used, no serious and real measures have been taken to make use of the patented invention or the level of current use does not satisfy domestic demand. The same applies to an uninterrupted cease of use of a patent for more than three years without justified reason.

The only provision in Turkish law that provides rules about the results of not filing evidence on use of a patent is in the Regulation on the Implementation of IP Law, which states that:

"the declaration relaying whether the patent is used or not used is submitted to the Institute within a certain period and then published in the Bulletin. The patents for which no notification of use have been given within this period shall be published in the Bulletin."

The mentioned publication is a kind of announcement to third parties that the patent is not used (without a justified reason) and therefore a licence over the patent may be requested from the patent owner.

This publication can give rise to a compulsory licence demand. In the case of a compulsory licence demand, a fixed legal procedure must be followed, and the evidence filed before the Turkish Patent Office (TPO) before this procedure starts can only be an indication of use of the patent. The evidence of use filed before the TPO does not automatically prevent the third party from demanding a compulsory licence. However, the patent holder may refer to this document/evidence while claiming that it does use the patent or there is a legitimate reason for non-use of the patent.

The lack of such a document or evidence does not ease, quicken or remove the fixed legal procedure to be followed by the third party demanding the compulsory licence. The third party has to apply to the court for a compulsory licence and must prove that it has tried hard to obtain from the patent owner a contractual licence on reasonable commercial terms and within a reasonable period of time.

These IP law provisions show that filing evidence on use of a patent or filing a statement before the TPO explaining the legitimate reason for not using the patent is optional. However, we believe that such a filing may have a role in discouraging a third party from demanding a compulsory licence by alleging non-use of the patent without a legitimate reason.

Selin Sinem Erciyas

Gün + Partners

Kore Şehitleri Cad. 17

Zincirlikuyu 34394

İstanbul, Turkey

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

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

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Sukanya Sarkar shares her thoughts on this year’s annual meeting in Singapore, where debates ranged from AI opportunities to improving law firm culture
The court’s ruling is a good reminder that US parties aren’t guaranteed attorney fees just because they win, say sources
With business confidence in a shaky state, Rachel Tong and Lisa Yong of Rouse discuss how in-house IP teams can manage their trademark portfolios through uncertain times
The Court of Appeal had stern words for Med-El’s representatives after they highlighted a deputy judge’s background as a solicitor
Funders and NPEs say asserting patent portfolios can minimise risk at the USPTO’s PTAB, where procedure remains a controversial topic
The US Supreme Court’s ruling wasn’t a surprise and reflects a trend that had already been bubbling away for a while, say tech and pharma counsel
Previous attempts at major transatlantic tie-ups have failed, so lawyers will keep their eyes firmly on Allen & Overy’s grand plans
INTA CEO Etienne Sanz de Acedo shares his plans if he were to win the EUIPO leadership race and says his application does not affect his INTA role
The French finance minister told António Campinos the timing of an EPO event in Lisbon could be seen as interference in the EUIPO leadership race