Evaluation of Loss of Right due to Silence in terms of Crime of Trademark Infringement

Taha Güler

Article Details

Evaluation of Loss of Right due to Silence in terms of Crime of Trademark Infringement

Authors:

Taha Güler

Publisher:

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University

Main Topics:

Ceza Hukuku

Journal:

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 3, pp.565-606

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

7/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001324169

pISSN:

2651-4141

Keywords:

Abstract:

 Some trials regarding the crime of trademark infringement regulated in Article 301 of the Industrial Property Law, they resulted in an acquittal based on Article 2232-a of the Criminal Procedure Law on the grounds that the trademark owner had consent based on loss of right due to silence with reference to Article 256 of the IPL. Although the existence of the material elements of the crime of trademark infringement and the consent of the trademark owner are stated in the acquittal decisions, these decisions based on Article 2232-a of the CPL is open to criticism. While some of these decisions were undergoing appeal review, they were filtered through Article 262 of the Turkish Penal Law which includes the consent of the person concerned and Article 2232-d of the CPL which regulates one of the cases of acquittal and resulted in the correction of the unlawfulness. However, loss of right due to silence does not meet some of the conditions of the consent of the person concerned, and in this respect, these decisions of the court of appeal become open to criticism. As a result, the loss of right due to silence in terms of the crime of trademark infringement will be discussed from different perspectives.

 Some trials regarding the crime of trademark infringement regulated in Article 301 of the Industrial Property Law, they resulted in an acquittal based on Article 2232-a of the Criminal Procedure Law on the grounds that the trademark owner had consent based on loss of right due to silence with reference to Article 256 of the IPL. Although the existence of the material elements of the crime of trademark infringement and the consent of the trademark owner are stated in the acquittal decisions, these decisions based on Article 2232-a of the CPL is open to criticism. While some of these decisions were undergoing appeal review, they were filtered through Article 262 of the Turkish Penal Law which includes the consent of the person concerned and Article 2232-d of the CPL which regulates one of the cases of acquittal and resulted in the correction of the unlawfulness. However, loss of right due to silence does not meet some of the conditions of the consent of the person concerned, and in this respect, these decisions of the court of appeal become open to criticism. As a result, the loss of right due to silence in terms of the crime of trademark infringement will be discussed from different perspectives.

 Some trials regarding the crime of trademark infringement regulated in Article 301 of the Industrial Property Law, they resulted in an acquittal based on Article 2232-a of the Criminal Procedure Law on the grounds that the trademark owner had consent based on loss of right due to silence with reference to Article 256 of the IPL. Although the existence of the material elements of the crime of trademark infringement and the consent of the trademark owner are stated in the acquittal decisions, these decisions based on Article 2232-a of the CPL is open to criticism. While some of these decisions were undergoing appeal review, they were filtered through Article 262 of the Turkish Penal Law which includes the consent of the person concerned and Article 2232-d of the CPL which regulates one of the cases of acquittal and resulted in the correction of the unlawfulness. However, loss of right due to silence does not meet some of the conditions of the consent of the person concerned, and in this respect, these decisions of the court of appeal become open to criticism. As a result, the loss of right due to silence in terms of the crime of trademark infringement will be discussed from different perspectives.

 Sınai Mülkiyet Kanununun 301. maddesinde düzenlenen marka hakkına tecavüz suçunu konu alan bazı yargılamalar, SMKnin 256. maddesine atıfla marka sahibinin sessiz kalma nedeniyle hak kaybına dayalı rızasının bulunduğu gerekçesiyle, Ceza Muhakemesi Kanununun 2232-a maddesi üzerinden beraatle sonuçlanmıştır. Beraat kararlarında marka hakkına tecavüz suçunun maddi unsurlarının varlığı ile marka sahibinin rızası belirtilmesine rağmen CMKnin 2232-a maddesine göre verilen bu kararlar eleştiriye açıktır. Bu kararlardan bir kısmı istinaf incelemesinden geçerken, ilgilinin rızasına yer veren Türk Ceza Kanununun 262. maddesi ile beraat hallerinden birini düzenleyen CMKnin 2232-d maddesinin süzgecinden geçirilmiş ve hukuka aykırılığın düzeltilmesiyle sonuçlanmıştır. Fakat ilgilinin rızası marka hakkına tecavüz suçu bağlamında sessiz kalma nedeniyle hak kaybı üstünden değerlendirilirken, bu hukuka uygunluk nedeninin maddi şartlarının detaylı şekilde incelenmesi gerekmektedir. İncelemenin sonucu ise sessiz kalma nedeniyle hak kaybının ilgilinin rızasının şartlarından bir kısmını sağlamadığını ortaya koymakta olup bu yönüyle istinaf mahkemesi kararları da eleştiriye açık hale gelmektedir. Neticede bütün bu kararlar çalışmamızda eleştirel yönden ele alındıktan sonra marka hakkına tecavüz suçu açısından sessiz kalma nedeniyle hak kaybı farklı bakış açılarıyla ele alınacaktır.

Article Details

Evaluation of Loss of Right due to Silence in terms of Crime of Trademark Infringement

Authors:

Taha Güler

Publisher:

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University

Main Topics:

Ceza Hukuku

Journal:

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 3, pp.565-606

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

7/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001324169

pISSN:

2651-4141

Crime of trademark infringement

Loss of right due to silence

Elements of crime

Consent of person concerned

Error.Marka hakkına tecavüz suçu

Sessiz kalma nedeniyle hak kaybı

Suçun unsurları

İlgilinin rızası

Hata.

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Taha Güler

Publisher: Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University

Main Topics: Ceza Hukuku

Journal: Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 3, pp.565-606

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 7/2024

Document Language: Turkish

Document ID (Org No.): 2001324169

pISSN: 2651-4141

Issues

Authors:

Taha Güler

Publisher:

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University

Main Topics:

Ceza Hukuku

Journal:

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.28 Issue 3, pp.565-606

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

7/2024

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001324169

pISSN:

2651-4141