In short
If an employee takes the customer list, a breakdown that carries prices and discounts is read as a document separate from the person's own telephone book. A name that remains on a business card does not stand at the same level of confidentiality as the company's printout that is closed to the outside. This text sets no month for a non-compete. If the contract has a sentence of prohibition, that sentence is read. If it does not, a period is not written. No conclusion is built before the content of the record that was taken, and how the information was kept inside, have been seen.
A closed breakdown and an open card
A list the company did not give outside can carry, beside the customer name, a price, a discount, and an order history. These columns are not the same document as a few names that remained in the employee's memory. Which one was taken is read from an email annex, a download record, or a printer printout. While there is no record, a sentence of "they took it in their head" does not take the place of the breakdown. A catalogue open to everyone cannot be put in place of the closed list, because the place the catalogue circulated can weaken a claim of confidentiality. A download made after the exit is placed beside the leaving record in the personnel file. This order is not filled with an invented month.
Neighbouring questions are not a shortening of the breakdown
An employee's invention stands under employee invention, and a work produced at work stands under owner of the work. A bare idea, in my idea was taken, and the distinction between a patent and a secret, in patent or trade secret, are separate questions. A customer breakdown is not a shortening of these four. A non-compete being in the contract does not of itself prove that the list is a trade secret. The sentence of prohibition, and the arrangement for keeping it, ask for separate papers. The definition of a trade secret also stays under trade secret, and it is not carried here as a month.
How the breakdown is separated
The document that was kept, the confidentiality contract, and the annex of any dispute petition are read together. The three are not copies of each other. A lawyer in Ankara does not read the Çankaya address as the place where the trade secret was kept. Keeping it comes out of the company's own arrangement. The month of a non-compete is not written in this heading either, because a month is read only from the sentence in the contract, and if there is no sentence a period is not invented.
The leaving record, and the catalogue
The leaving in the personnel file does not, on its own, show that the breakdown is a secret. The date only builds the order of the download and the exit. If the download was made before the exit, and the file remained on the employee's personal device, who holds the copy is written separately. If the company handed out the same list at a fair stand, the claim of a closed breakdown is weakened. The catalogue that was handed out and the price column are placed side by side. Which version stands in the annex to the application is chosen before the draft of the decision, and a missing annex is not treated as completed with a list remembered later.
From which document the arrangement for keeping it is read
The company should show who could open the list, which folder it stood in, and whether taking it outside depended on authority. This arrangement is the document of whether the breakdown will be counted as a secret. Cards left from the employee's own meetings can stand as an address book without a price column, and that book is not of itself written as a copy of the closed printout. The same name being both in the book and in the breakdown does not, on its own, show that the whole list was taken. The lines that overlap are described one by one. The date, the version, and the system from which the printout enclosed with the petition was taken are written. A missing annex is not treated as completed with a table remembered later.
If protection is sought, what is sought is which document's reproduction will be stopped, and this request does not fill the month of the non-compete. If the month is not in the contract, it is not here either. The decision is reached without counting the catalogue handed out at the fair, and the breakdown with a price column, at the same level of confidentiality. If the contract carries only a general sentence of loyalty, that sentence does not of itself make the columns of the closed list a secret. How the columns were kept inside is read separately. Who downloaded the printout is written from the system record, if there is one, and a witness account is not, on its own, counted as a document of the download. If it comes out that the company also sent the same list to rivals, the claim of confidentiality is weakened separately. The person it was sent to, and the employee who took it, are not joined in the same sentence.
Conclusion
In a list file, what is looked at is the columns of the document that was taken, and how the information was kept inside. A personal address book does not stand in for this breakdown. If the month of a non-compete is not in the contract, it is not written, and the existence of the prohibition does not of itself create the secret. The frame is on the intellectual property page, and the basis is the text of Law No. 6769, the Industrial Property Code.