Decision On Contract Cancellation

06 Mar Decision On Contract Cancellation

T.C. SUPREME

11.Legal Department
Basis: 2005/3506
Decision: 2006/4425
Decision Date: 13.04.2006

DETERMINATION CASE – REQUEST TO DETERMINE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO USE FINANCIAL RIGHTS ON THE ELECTRONIC TRANSLATION DICTIONARY – ACCEPTANCE OF DATABASES AS COMPILATION WORKS – NEED TO OBTAIN EXPERT EXPERT REPORT

Abstract: databases are considered compilation works. The main element that allows a database to be considered a compilation work is the way in which data and materials are selected and compiled. A collection of databases that occur as a result of selecting and compiling data and materials according to a specific purpose and within a specific plan, and can be read with a tool or in other format, is preserved as a work. However, the protection provided here cannot be extended to protect data materials contained in the database. The data and materials used in the database may be publicly available information obtained in any way, or they may be included in one of the types of works listed in the Fsek. If the data used constitutes one of the types of works protected by the Fsek, it is necessary to create and carry the characteristics of the compiler, provided that the work used to gain ownership of the database does not damage the rights of the owner. Compilation on databases is a mandatory feature requirement for ownership of works, the format in which the data and materials used are selected and compiled.

(5846 P. K. m. 1, 6, 18, 49, 52, 88) (2675 S. K. m. 32) (1086 P. K. m. 275)

Case: Istanbul 1. 23.12.2004 date and 2002/195-2004/752 decision issued by the Court of intellectual and industrial Rights Law Court was requested by the Supreme Court and it was understood that the appeal petition was given within the period, after the report organized by the examination Judge Ramazan Ozcan for the case file was heard and the petition in the file was read and reviewed, the minutes of the hearing and all the documents were considered as necessary for the work:

Verdict: counsel for the plaintiffs, from their client Atlas Electronics Ltd. Ltd.another client of First Trading Company Ltd. Hongkong (FTC).he is a dealer in Turkey, his client is the FTC and the defendant is herpa Ltd. Ltd. the distribution agreement between them and ATLAS branded electronic dictionary, databank and all copyrights and other industrial rights on the database belong to his client, they agreed to sell the products in Turkey, the databases to be used, the defendant company on behalf of his client FTC prepared Ali Bayram, the cost of this was paid by his client FTC, it is understood from the letter of the Ministry of Culture, defendant Baran Ozdogan had nothing to do with this work, but then that is actually understood and financial rights of the data base client phono copyrights in publishing that was purchased from this company by the FTC, citing branded electronic databanks of the artifacts that are used in pairwise Atlas dictionary and assist client with determination of rights among all financial contracts that belongs to the FTC has prosecuted defendants held as a cancellation request and fake.

The Defendants Are Herpa Ltd. Ltd. with Baran Özdoğan acting, derdestlik objected, plaintiff Atlas Elektronik Ltd. Ltd.he asked for the dismissal of the case, arguing that nin did not have a driver’s license for active hostility, that this case was opened in order to overcome the ban on expanding the defense in the previous case, and that the case was opened maliciously and unfairly.

According to the claim, defense, evidence collected and the expert report adopted by the court, the plaintiff Atlas Ltd. Ltd.because of the marketing of Atlas branded products in Turkey on behalf of the other defendant, the plaintiff has a driver’s license for active hostility, since the parties to this case are not the same as the previous case, the derdestlik appeal is not in place, the plaintiff FTC and the defendant Herpa Ltd. Ltd. 12 of the distributorship agreement signed between. according to the article, it was decided that all rights were transferred to the plaintiff and that the database fee was paid by the plaintiff according to the Ministry of Culture article, with the partial acceptance of the case, it was determined that the intellectual property rights of the Atlas branded electronic dictionary device belong to the plaintiff FTC, and only on the grounds that the request for cancellation of the contract concerns the parties.

The defendants ‘ attorney appealed the decision.

1-7(8) of the Bern Convention due to the fact that the ATLAS branded electronic translation dictionary, which is subject to a lawsuit, was first released in Turkey. article and FSEK.nun 88. according to the principle of equal treatment in accordance with the provisions of the article, the claimant of a foreign state nature is the MÖHUK of First Trading Company Ltd.nun 32. according to the fact that he is immune from the collateral condition in his article, the defendants ‘ attorney’s Appeals for this direction are not in place.

2-however, the dispute between the parties is that the authority to exercise financial rights over the ATLAS branded electronic translation dictionary is one of the plaintiffs First Trading Company Ltd. Ltd.it relates to the determination of whether it belongs to the (FTC).

Turkish/English dictionary data in this database is a database of ATLAS branded electronic translation dictionary as a summary in the original reports of the expert panel dated 14.08.2003 and dated 19.04.2004, which are based on the court’s decision, the defendant Herpa International Tic. Co.Ltd. (HERPA) was sent by the plaintiff to the FTC, and the database created by the plaintiff was decided to be put on the market in Turkey by the defendant HERPA in accordance with the distributorship agreement dated 17.12.1997 between them, and 12 of the aforementioned agreement. according to the article, The Financial Rights on the database in question belong to the plaintiff FTC.

In addition, as a result of the agreement between the parties, it is explained that the database subject to the lawsuit was put on the market in Turkey with the POLY LINGUA brand owned by defendant herpa, not with the ATLAS brand, and this will not make defendant Herpa the owner of financial rights on the database.

The Turkish English dictionary data used in the ATLAS Electronic translation dictionary subject to the lawsuit is the same as the data in the electronic dictionary released by the defendant HERPA under the POLY LINGUA brand.

English/Turkish dictionary data in ATLAS branded electronic dictionary was transferred by contract dated 17.12.1997 with Defendant HERPA and by paying royalties to Ali Bayram from defendants, so he has the authority to exercise financial rights over the dictionary, as well as Ankara 13. Magistrates ‘ Court 2001/27 D.Job received through the assessment of the Expert Report No. evidence in the file, in fact this data not belonging to a case of defendant Ali phono Festival taken from a dictionary that is sent from a company out of great out of the case and on the determination by the convention on the transfer of the rights with the company Atlas Financial Dictionary financial rights of the authority to use the branded suggested they transfer from the company.

English/Turkish dictionary data, in which defendant Herpa inherited its financial rights under the transfer agreement dated 14.05.1997, made by other defendant real persons, was sent to the plaintiff FTC and the electronic dictionary was built on behalf of defendant HERPA and put on the market under the registered POLY LINGUA brand, all financial rights on the dictionary belong to them, despite this, the plaintiff argued that after the FTC used the same data in an ATLAS-branded electronic dictionary without permission from him and imported it through another plaintiff company and placed it on the market in Turkey, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit and complaint against Atlas and non-litigious individuals.

Need expert’s report and in other reports that are offered to the above mentioned file, and poly lingua branded electronic translation dictionaries Atlas database, and the same in both Turkish/English Dictionary is described where data is used. However, the expert reports received are not sufficient to resolve the dispute between the parties.

FSEKnun 1 / B and 6/11. according to the article, the compilation of databases has been considered works. The main element that allows a database to be considered a compilation work is the way in which data and materials are selected and compiled. Indeed, FSEK.nun 6/11. according to the article, databases that arise as a result of selecting and compiling data and materials according to a specific purpose and within a special plan, and can be read with a tool or in other format, are preserved as a compilation work. However, the protection provided here cannot be extended to protect data materials contained in the database. The data and materials used in the database may be publicly available information obtained in any way, or they may be included in one of the types of works listed in the Fsek. If the data used constitutes one of the types of works protected by the Fsek, it is necessary to create and carry the characteristics of the compiler, provided that the work used to gain ownership of the database does not damage the rights of the owner. Compilation on databases is a mandatory feature requirement for ownership of works, the format in which the data and materials used are selected and compiled. After all, the main protection is the FSEK of data and materials when conditions occur.nun 6/11. <compilation on the database is the ownership of the artifact>created by selecting and compiling in the sense of the element.

Determination of the existence of a compilation work is considered by the courts in every concrete dispute. In the expert reports based on the provision, it was stated that the dictionaries mentioned were a database without examining the elements of the compilation work.

First of all, the subject of dispute is the FSEK Atlas branded electronic translation dictionary.nun 1 / B and 6/11. it is necessary to determine with certainty whether it has created a database in accordance with its articles. Turkish/English dictionary data used in the database must be determined whether they are works created by the defendant’s natural persons or data known and available to all.

English/Turkish dictionary data is processed and selected by the plaintiff FTC and it cannot be proved that the said database was duly transferred by the plaintiff FTC to the defendant Herpa.nun 6/11. and 18/2. in accordance with its articles, its defense that it has the authority to exercise financial rights over the database will not be valued.

Turkish / English dictionary data used in the database, however, is in the nature of bizatihi work if it is understood that; Ankara 13 is available in the file. Magistrates ‘ Court 2001/21 D.Work. Turkish/English dictionary used as data, taking into account the expert opinion in the numbered evidence detection file, determining the ownership of the rights of the defendant’s natural persons and according to the result of the plaintiff FTC or defendant HERPA FSEK.nun 18., 49. and 52. according to their articles, it will be necessary to determine whether the financial rights or the authority (license) to use this data have been transferred from the owner of the work through a valid contract, and the dispute will be resolved in this way.

In this case, a decision must be made according to the result that will be obtained by taking a reasoned and favorable audit report from a new panel of experts in the field of intellectual rights, including a computer expert, by the court, while the partial acceptance of the case as a result of incomplete examination was not considered correct.

3-also, Atlas Electronic Marketing Ltd., one of the plaintiffs. Ltd.’s Financial Dictionary is entitled to exercise the rights in dispute have not put forward a claim that the plaintiff’s only other dealer in the market as the FTC’s Dictionary of the plaintiffs dispute, it is understood that whereas the plaintiff Atlas Electronic Marketing Ltd. Ltd.the active claimant adjective of does not exist. Of The Plaintiffs, Atlas Electronic Marketing Ltd. Ltd. since it was not considered correct that the case was rejected due to the absence of active animosity, the decision had to be overturned by the acceptance of the appeals of the defendants ‘ attorney.

Conclusion: for the reasons described above (1), the decision (2) to reject other appeals of the defendant’s attorney for the reasons written in paragraph. and (3) it was unanimously decided on 13.04.2006 that the damages for the benefit of the defendants for written reasons in Bent, the return of the advance costs of the appeal they paid to the appellants in case of their request.