{"id":545,"date":"2019-08-15T14:20:31","date_gmt":"2019-08-15T14:20:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.epoxdemo.com.tr\/eyubogluas\/?p=545"},"modified":"2023-01-30T09:31:58","modified_gmt":"2023-01-30T09:31:58","slug":"devrim-karari","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/devrim-karari\/","title":{"rendered":"DEVRIM DECISION"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

In accordance with the ruling that The Turkish Court of Cassation\u2019s Assembly of Civil Chambers; the expression of \u201cDevrim\u201d in terms of 12 th class commodities, excepted as an expression that as stated in the Decree code 556 article 7\/1-h \u201cis in the scope of the signs that became public knowledge and cannot be given to someone else\u2019s monopoly because of their interest with public, history and cultural values. This decision originates from the fact that the Turkey\u2019s first domestic car which is called \u201cDevrim\u201d and it becoming a part of the country\u2019s history.<\/span><\/p>\n

REPUBLIC OF TURKEY, COURT OF CASSATION ASSEMBLY OF CIVIL CHAMBERS<\/span>
\nFILE NO: 2017\/118<\/span>
\nAWARD NO: 2019\/146<\/span>
\nAWARD DATE: 14.02.2019<\/span><\/p>\n

Through the inspection of the plenary committee, it has been established that the decision of persistence has been appealed within the legal time frame. Available documents have been analyzed and a verdict has been reached. Claimant\u2019s attorney remarks that the claimant of the case is a state-owned enterprise, working in partnership with General Directorate of Turkish State Railways, which is formed as per the regulations laid out within statutory decree no: 233; that the claimant\u2019s business activities consist of locomotive and wagon production; that in 1961 production of a commercial automobile had been mandated by the elect President Cemal G\u00fcrsel, through the utilization of the technical capability of Turkish State Railways; that consequently, preparations had gone underway to begin production of a commercial automobile within the claimant\u2019s facilities; that the said automobile was named \u201cDEVRIM\u201d; that the lone existing production model of the automobile, being kept in a specialized showcasing belonging to Turkey Locomotion and Engine Industry Incorporated, is still in functional condition; that the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d has been registered as a trademark in 12 th , 35 th and 37 th classifications on 02.03.2007 by the defendant, yet the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d is the name of the first automobile produced locally, in the history of the Republic of Turkey, hence as per statutory decree no: 556 article 7\/1-h is inadmissible as a trademark, and that the claimant is the pioneering party to use the name commercially thus has the pre-emptive right of registration as per statutory decree no: 556 article 8\/3; and that the defendant party has never commercially utilized the trademark since its registration. Therefore the claimant\u2019s attorney requests the court to nullify the registration of the trademark no: 2006\/08150 in 12 th classification and remove said trademark from the trademark registry.<\/span>
\nDaval\u0131 vekili; m\u00fcvekkil \u015firketin \u201cilk yerli Ferrari\u201d ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda E\u2026 markal\u0131 ara\u00e7lar \u00fcretti\u011fini, \u201cDevrim\u201d ibaresinin de bu arac\u0131n modellerinden biri oldu\u011funu savunarak davan\u0131n reddini istemi\u015ftir.<\/span>
\nYerel mahkemece; be\u015f y\u0131ll\u0131k s\u00fcre dava tarihinde dolmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan davac\u0131n\u0131n 556 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK\u2019nin 42\/1-c ve 14. maddelerine dayal\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck isteminin esastan incelenmesine yasal olanak bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u201cdevrim\u201d s\u00f6zc\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn yayg\u0131n bilinen ilk anlam\u0131 ve genel alg\u0131 itibariyle belirli bir alanda veya toplumsal olarak h\u0131zl\u0131 ve k\u00f6kl\u00fc de\u011fi\u015fimlere verilen bir isimden ibaret bulunup, do\u011frudan do\u011fruya tarihi, k\u00fclt\u00fcrel bir de\u011fer veya bu nitelikte bir nesne ile \u00f6zde\u015fle\u015fmi\u015f olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131 delillerinin kelimenin KHK\u2019n\u0131n 7\/1-(h) bendi anlam\u0131nda, tarihi, k\u00fclt\u00fcrel bir de\u011fer ve ki\u015fili\u011fi ifade eden bir i\u015faret oldu\u011funu kan\u0131tlamaya yetmedi\u011fi, 556 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK\u2019n\u0131n 7\/1-(h) h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, d\u00f6nemsel, b\u00f6lgesel, sekt\u00f6rel g\u00fcndem olu\u015fturan, ki\u015fi olay veya \u00fcr\u00fcn adlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fil toplum belle\u011finde yer etmi\u015f, tarihi veya k\u00fclt\u00fcrel \u00f6nemi ve de\u011feri yayg\u0131n olarak kabul g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f ad ve i\u015faretlerin marka olarak bir kimsenin tekeline verilmesini \u00f6nlemek amac\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla \u201cDevrim\u201d ibaresinin 12. s\u0131n\u0131f y\u00f6n\u00fcnden marka olarak tescilinin KHK\u2019n\u0131n 7\/1-(h) h\u00fckm\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n \u201cDevrim\u201d ibaresini 12. s\u0131n\u0131ftaki otomobil, kara ta\u015f\u0131tlar\u0131 ve par\u00e7alar\u0131 mallar\u0131nda ticaret markas\u0131 olarak kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair bir iddia ve delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla davac\u0131n\u0131n \u201cDevrim\u201d ibaresi \u00fczerinde markasal olarak kullan\u0131mdan kaynaklanan KHK\u2019n\u0131n 8\/3 h\u00fckm\u00fc anlam\u0131nda korunabilir bir hak elde etti\u011fini kabule de imkan olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/span><\/p>\n

Defendant\u2019s attorney remarks that the defendant party has been producing automobiles of ETOX branding under<\/span><\/p>\n

the name \u201cFirst locally produced<\/span><\/p>\n

Ferrari\u201d and that the name \u201cDEVRIM\u201d belongs to one of the models of said automobiles; thus requests the court to dismiss the case of the claimant. According to the domestic court; the required 5 year time frame had not been expired at the date the lawsuit was filed, hence the nullification request of the claimant in accordance with statutory decree no: 556 article 42\/1-c and article 14 is inadmissible; the most widely accepted interpretation of the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d is \u201crapid and significant developments within a particular field\u201d and it is not associated with any particular historical or cultural values or objects; the claimant\u2019s collective evidence has not been found adequate to prove that the word has been associated with a cultural value or figure in accordance with statutory decree no: 556 article 7\/1-h; said article is in place to prevent words associated with historical, regional or sectoral trends and words that are historically and culturally significant from being registered as trademarks, thus the registration of the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d as a trademark in 12 th classification is in accordance with article 7\/1-h of said statutory decree; there is no evidence pertaining at the claimants usage of the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d to promote any particular land or sea vehicle and its parts within 12 th classification; hence the court has not found the claimant to have any pre-emptive registration rights for the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d in accordance with article 8\/3 of said decree. Consequently the district court has dismissed the case. As per the claimant\u2019s appeal to the verdict, the verdict has been reversed by the appropriate chamber of the court of cassation.The district court has later has persisted on the verdict by expanding on the aforementioned reasoning.\nThe decision of persistence by the district court has been appealed by the claimant party.JUSTIFICATION: In consideration of the statements written above, the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d has first been utilized in 1961 by the claimant to produce and promote the very first Turkish made automobile as mandated by the government of the era, thus carries significant value for Turkish automotive industry as well as a more general cultural significance within the public conscious as it is associated with the few automobiles produced as a result of this collective effort; the automobile has been publicly displayed in 2004 during the 29 th October celebrations, on the helipad belonging to Ankara Chamber of Commerce and later displayed in 2005 at the entrance to Uluda\u011f University, by the Bursa Society of Mechanical Engineers; additionally, a feature film that tells the story of the production of these automobiles has been produced; the claimant also maintains a functional model of the \u201cDEVRIM\u201d automobiles that is currently being on a public exhibition at the claimant\u2019s facilities in Eski\u015fehir which is being visited by thousands of visitors annually; consequently the court has found that the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d carries cultural significance within the public conscience. Therefore, as the word \u201cDEVRIM\u201d has been embraced by the public as a word that holds historical and cultural significance for the Turkish automotive industry as the first locally produced automobile, as per article 7\/1-h of decree no: 556, it is classified within \u201cmarks that belong to the public due to their association with historical and cultural values\u201d, thus becoming inadmissible as a trademark. In conclusion, the district court\u2019s decision of persistence against the initial reversal of the verdict by the court of cassation is found to the against the rule of law. Therefore, the district court\u2019s decision of persistence should be reversed.VERDICT: Claimant\u2019s appeal has been accepted and the decision of persistence by the district court has been reversed in accordance with the justification of the initial reversal verdict of the court of cassation.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulu\u2019nun verdi\u011fi karar ile; \u201cDevrim\u201d otomobillerinin ilk yerli otomobil olarak \u00fclke tarihinin bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olmas\u0131 ve bu hususun halk taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a benimsenmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda \u201cDevrim\u201d ibaresinin 12. s\u0131n\u0131ftaki t\u00fcm emtialar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan (k\u0131saca ta\u015f\u0131tlar ve par\u00e7alar\u0131) 556 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK\u2019nin 7\/1-h maddesinde yer alan \u201ckamuyu ilgilendiren, tarihi, k\u00fclt\u00fcrel de\u011ferler bak\u0131m\u0131ndan halka mal olmu\u015f\u201d i\u015faretler kapsam\u0131nda … Continue reading DEVRIM DECISION<\/span><\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-545","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-haberler"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/545","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=545"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/545\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":708,"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/545\/revisions\/708"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=545"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=545"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.eyubogluas.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=545"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}