95 Union of Turkish Bar Associations Review 2023 Dilara Naz GÜLÜM Decree-Law No. 556 nor the IPC No. 6769 defines it.34 In Article 3/4 of the Communiqué on Classification, it is stipulated that for determining the same type of goods or services, the groups listed in the annex of the Communiqué will be taken into account. However, it is also mentioned that during the application for registration or objection stages, TURKPATENT can evaluate these groups in a narrower or broader manner to include different groups of goods or services when determining the same type of goods or services. Although it may be stated that minor differences in the signs do not eliminate identity, this does not apply to goods or services.35 The issue may only arise when the goods or services are not identical in wording.36 According to Article 9/2 of the Regulation on the Implementation of the Industrial Property Code37, it is required that the goods/services for which trademark registration is sought be presented by categorizing them into Nice classes and indicating the class numbers of the goods/ services. However, in the following paragraph, it is stated that if the applicant uses general terms or expressions that need clarification by TURKPATENT, a two-month period will be granted. Therefore, as long as it is in accordance with the Nice classification, the person applying for a trademark can specify the goods and services using their own phrasing. As a result, identical goods/services can be expressed in different ways.38 Furthermore, according to the 2021 Guideline, in cases where identical goods/services have multiple names or where the usage in the market is different from the technical/scientific/literary name or where the name in a foreign language has been adopted into Turkish, even if the goods/ services are expressed differently, they will be considered as identical.39 In some cases, even if products are expressed in the same manner, they might be considered different based on their intended use.40 As 34 Savaş Bozbel, Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku (Intellectual Property Law), Istanbul 2015, p. 383. 35 Yasaman Hamdi/Altay Sıtkı Anlam/Ayoğlu Tolga/Yusufoğlu Fülürya/Yüksel Sinan, Marka Hukuku 556 Sayılı KHK Şerhi (Commentary on Decree-Law No. 556 on Trademark Law), Vol. 1, Istanbul 2004, p. 228. 36 Paslı, p. 50. 37 OJ, D. 24.04.2017, N. 30047. 38 Paslı, p. 51. 39 2021 Guideline, p. 392. 40 Paslı, p. 52.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1