ERDEM-NEWSLETTER-2018-metin

329 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW the malicious intent, the real right holder may file a law suit for the in- validity of the trademark to ensure the cancellation of the registration. It should be noted that pursuant to Article 25.6 of the IPL, as a general rule, if a trademark owner remains silent for 5 (five) consecu- tive years towards the use of a trademark that is the same or similar to his/her trademark, even if s/he is aware or should be aware, the owner shall not put forward his/her trademark as grounds for invalid- ity. However, if the next dated trademark is registered maliciously, the trademark owner shall not suffer from the loss of rights resulting his/ her silence. Conclusion Third persons’ intent to profit from the reputation of trademarks that have been created, used and presented by real right holders where ever they may be in the world, is unacceptable. The territorial prin- ciple of trademark laws are interpreted widely within this scope, as the protection of bad faith intent is contrary to fundamental law rules and good faith. Thus, the IPL and established jurisprudence protect symbols and foreign trademarks, as well as well-known trademarks, that are not registered in Turkey within the scope of the Turkish Patent and/or the Madrid Protocol; whereas, the malicious registration re- quests of the same or similar versions of the symbols and trademarks, in the same or similar good and service classes is regulated as relative grounds for refusal of trademark registration. Upon the objection of the real right holder, the registration applications shall be rejected. In addition, maliciously registered trademarks shall be cancelled and removed from the trademark registry through invalidity cases.