104 “Identity or Similarity of Goods of Services” Under The Industrial Property Code No. 6769 • Similarity arising from the competitive nature of goods and services, • Similarity arising from the complementary nature of goods and services. 1. The Emergence of the Criteria Following the tradition of case law, the United Kingdom is a pioneer in determining similarity criteria. The Jellinek test, developed in the Jellinek application in 1946 and subsequently applied with some modifications, is based on three fundamental questions:77 • What is the structure and composition of the products? • What are the relevant areas of use for the products? • What are the trade channels for buying and selling the products? • In the British Sugar78 case, while these three questions are fundamental, answers to the following questions have also been sought:79 • Are the products sold on the same shelves in supermarkets? • Do the products compete? How are they commercially classified? The questions mentioned above continue to remain pertinent in today’s context when determining similarity. 2. List of Applicable Criteria a. Nature of Goods/Services The nature of goods/services is determined by considering the fundamental characteristics and qualities of the goods/services. In this determination, elements such as the components of the good, its operational principles, and its physical form are taken into account.80 The nature of services, on the other hand, is determined based on the type of action provided to third parties. For instance, cinema and 77 Paslı, p. 70. 78 British Sugar Plc. v. James Robertson & Sons Ltd. (1996) (http://www.peteryu. com/intip_msu/britishsugar.pdf, Last acessed: 05.06.2021). 79 Paslı, p. 70. 80 2021 Guideline, p. 396.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1