REGISTER LOGIN

Lawyers Uğur Aktekin

Uğur Aktekin

Uğur Aktekin

Gün + Partners
[email protected]
BIOGRAPHY
INSIGHTS

Uğur Aktekin joined Gün + Partners in 1999 and has been a partner since 2003. He is co-chair of the firm’s intellectual property practice and the technology, media and telecom industry practice.

Uğur’s Intellectual Property practice focuses on trademarks, designs and copyrights.

He advises on implementing IP protection and enforcement strategies and portfolio management, representing clients before the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office, as well as cancellation, infringement and other court actions and domain name ADR proceedings, filing for interlocutory and precautionary injunctions, negotiating and drafting co-existence, settlement and licensing agreements.

Uğur has been involved in numerous anti-piracy campaigns, civil litigation, criminal raids and litigation involving software copyrights, cinematographic and musical copyrights, cartoon character copyrights, architectural copyrights, databases and television film formats.

His TMT practice covers media, advertising, consumer, internet, technology licensing, information technologies, computer software, computer games, data protection, data privacy and security.

He advises on all aspects of advertising and media laws, including clearance of advertisements, contracts, promotions and sweepstakes to various local and multinational companies primarily on food and beverages, technology, media, telecom and entertainment sectors.

Uğur also advises on data protection legislation, website privacy policies and terms of use under Turkish law.


Practice Areas & Work Department

Intellectual Property

Trademarks and Designs

Copyrights

IP Prosecution

Technology, Media and Telecom


Languages

English

Turkish


Memberships

International Federation of Intellectual Property Attorneys of Turkey (FICPI Turkey), Founder and Former President

International Bar Association (IBA)

Association Internationale pour la Protection de la Propriété Intellectuelle (AIPPI)

International Federation of Intellectual Property Attorneys (FICPI)

International Trademark Association (INTA), Data Protection Committee

International Technology Law Association (ITECHLAW)

Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)

Patent and Trademark Attorneys’ Association of Turkey (PEM)

Recent Update on Well-known Trademark Protection in Türkiye

Well-known trademark registry of the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office became a discussion topic after the Turkish Court of Cassation decided in 2020 that the Office has no authority to create and maintain a registry for well-known trademarks.
Uğur Aktekin
Begüm Soydan Sayılkan
03.12.2024

İstanbul Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi 20. Hukuk Dairesi’nin 2021/1507 E 2023/1017 K. sayılı ve 2306.2023 Tarihli Kararı Kapsamında Marka Hakkına Tecavüz Davalarında Sessiz Kalma Yoluyla Hak Kaybı İlkesine Bakış

Sessiz kalma yoluyla hak kaybı ilkesi, marka hakkına tecavüz davaları bakımından düzenlenmiş bir kavram olmayıp, yıllar içerisinde doktrindeki görüşler ve yargı kararları ile hatları ve çerçevesi çizilen ve temelde 4721 sayılı Türk Medeni Kanunu madde 2 “dürüst davranma ilkesi” kapsamında anlaşılması gereken bir ilke olup, içinde “çelişkili davranma yasağı”, “kullanımı bilme/bilebilme”, “ciddi kullanım”, “hak düşürücü süre”, “bu sürenin başlangıcı” ve “süreyi kesen fiiller” gibi birçok kavramı barındırmaktadır[1].
Güldeniz Doğan Alkan
Uğur Aktekin
Cansu Evren
17.07.2024

Trademark Filing History May Result in Finding of Bad Faith Under Turkish Law

It is widely accepted in the literature[1] and decisions of the Court of Cassation[2] (“CoC”) that an applicant's attempt to create a trademark portfolio by trying to register other well-known trademarks can be sufficient to constitute proof of bad faith.
Uğur Aktekin
Baran Güney
Elif Melis Özsoy
06.03.2024

PTO Issues Important Decision on Distinctiveness of Trademarks Consisting of Device Element and Descriptive Words

The Turkish Patent and Trademark Office's Re-examination and Evaluation Board (REEB) overturned the Trademarks Directorate's refusal of a mark application. The application included a device element followed by descriptive words, "Clinical Trial Center." The REEB determined that the device element provided distinctiveness to the mark, and the descriptive phrase was not the main element. The decision emphasized the importance of the size and position of elements in composite trademarks. It clarified that registration wouldn't grant exclusive rights to the descriptive word element.
Uğur Aktekin
Selin Bilik
04.07.2023

Türk Marka Hukuku’nda Müktesep Hak Kavramı ve Uygulamasına Bir Eleştiri

Türk Marka Hukukunda müktesep hak uygulaması Yargıtayımızın içtihatları ile belirlediği ilkeler çerçevesinde şekillenmiştir. Müktesep hak ilkesi gereğince, bazı istisnai durum ve koşullarda bir işletmeye ait önceki marka, bu işletmenin daha sonraki marka başvuruları için kazanılmış hak teşkil eder. Yargıtay içtihatları çerçevesinde müktesep hak ilkesinin uygulanması için önceki tarihli marka ile sonraki tarihli markaların benzer olması, markaların kapsadıkları mal/hizmet sınıflarının aynı olması ve önceki tarihli markanın çekişme konusu olmaktan çıkmış olması ilkelerinin kümülatif olarak sağlanmış olması gerekmektedir
Uğur Aktekin
Utku Süngü
31.05.2023

Recent Developments in TURKPATENT's Practice on Recording of Well-known Trademarks

We have previously reported on the Turkish Court of Cassation’s decision concluding that the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office has no authority to create and maintain a registry for well-known trademarks and discussed possible repercussions of this decision for trademark owners.
Uğur Aktekin
Begüm Soydan Sayılkan
17.04.2023

DELPHI v DEPLHI: PTO’s Decision Sheds Light on Interpretation of Bad Faith

Delphi Technologies IP Limited opposed the registration of the DEPLHI trademark in Classes 1, 3, and 4, citing similarities to its earlier mark DELPHI used in the automotive spare parts sector. The Turkish Patent and Trademark Office initially rejected the opposition but the Re-examination and Evaluation Board later accepted it, finding that the trademarks were similar and covered similar goods and services. The board also concluded that the DEPLHI application was filed in bad faith given the distinctiveness and reputation of the DELPHI mark in the sector. The decision demonstrates the importance of considering all relevant factors in assessing bad faith in trademark disputes.
Uğur Aktekin
Selin Bilik
30.01.2023

Protection of Websites Under Turkish Law

The legal protection of websites in Turkey is a complex issue that requires practitioners to be aware of all possible legal remedies and the possibilities of infringement. Although there is no straightforward regulation to confer legal protection to websites under Turkish law, courts consider the specific circumstances of each case and assess the limit of the allowed use. The stronger the originality of the website, the stronger the legal protection would be. To protect their websites, owners should register trademarks, establish comprehensive contracts with independent contractors, monitor the market for potential infringement, and ensure the security of their intellectual property.
Uğur Aktekin
Havva Yıldız
03.01.2023
Load More
Ready to stay ahead of the curve?
Share your interest anonymously and let us guide you through the informative articles on the hottest legal topics.
|
Successful Your message has been sent