Publication: MARKANIN KULLANILMAMASI SEBEBİYLE İPTALİNE İLİŞKİN GÜNCEL SORUNLARIN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ
Abstract
Tescilli bir markanın tescil tarihinden itibaren beş yıl süreyle kullanılmamasıya da kullanımına beş yıldan uzun süre ara verilmesi halinde iptali, ülkemizde uzunyıllardır yasal dayanağı mevcut olan ve marka hukukuna ilişkin uluslararası düzenlemelerdede yer bulan hukuki bir düzenlemedir. Markanın kullanılmaması sebebiyle iptali6769 Sayılı Sınai Mülkiyet Kanunu’nda da yer almış olup bu Kanun markanın kullanılmamasınayeni hukuki sonuçlar da öngörmüştür. Ancak Anayasa Mahkemesi 6769Sayılı Sınai Mülkiyet Kanunu yürürlüğe girmeden önce mülga 556 Sayılı KHK’damarkanın kullanılmaması sebebiyle iptalini düzenleyen m. 14 hükmünü iptal etmiştir.Bu iptal kararıyla birlikte bir yandan tescilli marka sahiplerinin markalarını kullanmalarınıdestekleyen yeni hukuki sonuçlar öngörülürken, diğer yandan hukukumuzda markanınkullanılmaması sebebiyle iptali hususunda bir hukuk boşluğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Buçalışmada tescilli bir markanın kullanılması külfetinin amacı ve meydana gelen hukukboşluğu karşısında olası çözüm yolu incelenecektir.
The revocation of a registered trademark depending on the non-use thereof for five years from the date of registration or if it is used for more than five years, is a legal arrangement that has a legal basis for many years in our country and it also takes place in international regulations on trademark law. The revocation of the non-use trademark is also included in the Industrial Property Law No. 6769 which provides new legal solutions to the problem of non-use of trademarks. However, in the repealed Decree Law No. 556 revocation of such trademarks were regulated under Article 14 which had been cancelled by the Constitutional Court before the Law Numbered 6769 entered into force. With this cancellation decision, on one hand new legal results that support registered trademark owners to use their trademarks are provided, on the other hand a law gap occurred due to the revocation of the unused trademark. In this study, purpose of the use of a registered trademark and possible way to fill this gap occurred will be examined.
The revocation of a registered trademark depending on the non-use thereof for five years from the date of registration or if it is used for more than five years, is a legal arrangement that has a legal basis for many years in our country and it also takes place in international regulations on trademark law. The revocation of the non-use trademark is also included in the Industrial Property Law No. 6769 which provides new legal solutions to the problem of non-use of trademarks. However, in the repealed Decree Law No. 556 revocation of such trademarks were regulated under Article 14 which had been cancelled by the Constitutional Court before the Law Numbered 6769 entered into force. With this cancellation decision, on one hand new legal results that support registered trademark owners to use their trademarks are provided, on the other hand a law gap occurred due to the revocation of the unused trademark. In this study, purpose of the use of a registered trademark and possible way to fill this gap occurred will be examined.