In short
A multiple design application is a way of filing more than one appearance in the same file and in the same product group. It differs from an application for a single appearance. The question of what it is for sits between ease of procedure and reading each image on its own. The term of protection is not in this text. No result of combining is stated without the set of images.
Colour or ornament variations of the same family are frequent candidates. Forcing products that are far apart into one file can produce a separation, or a refusal. The advantage is discussed only if the images sit in the same frame. The frame is not built from an oral description.
When the same file makes sense
A family of models in the same product group is the typical subject of a multiple application. The image of each appearance must be separate and clear. If one is blurred, that unit remains incomplete. An incomplete unit is not treated as having of itself completed the other appearances. The class is read from what the product is. If the product name and the image conflict, the conflict is written.
If the application pastes the images on top of one another on a single page and leaves them unnumbered, it cannot be told which design is which. An image that cannot be picked out is not discussed as a separate right on the register. If the document gives each image an internal number, that number is kept. If there is no number, the comparison stays half done.
Does one defect affect the whole file?
Ease of administration is sought in a single file. A defect in one design can stop the file from being processed. That does not mean that every defect erases all of the rights. Which unit is incomplete is written. If it is not written, the refusal is read like a general refusal, and the defence stays general as well.
Novelty is asked separately for each appearance. One appearance being new does not of itself make the appearance beside it new. The distinction sits in the industrial design article and the novelty article. Which number was infringed sits under design infringement, and the international route sits under international application. A multiple file is not the short name of those headings.
How a multiple file is read
The image and the class record of each appearance are read separately. The term of protection is not written. The address of the office in Çankaya does not change the authority of the design register, or the competent court.
The decision is reached without sticking a defect in one image onto the whole family. The petition is incomplete if, apart from the file number, it does not write which appearance is in issue. If service gives notice of a separation or of a defect, that writing is kept. Service does not of itself fill in the term of protection. An invoice may show the application fee. The invoice does not show that each image was registered.
Separation, waiver, and infringement
Taking one appearance out of the file does not of itself change the effect of the appearances that remain. The removal is read from a written request. If there is no request, removal is not assumed. The remaining images stand with their own numbers. If the numbers are mixed, the infringement claim is mixed as well.
If the minutes write which image the product on the shelf matches, that line is what is discussed. The match is tied to the number shown, not to the file as a whole. If the contract says the design will remain with the person who drew it, ownership is read from there. If it does not say so, the multiple application does not create ownership. The register shows the applicant. The register does not make the person who drew the design and the owner the same person in every file.
If the number is mixed, the claim is mixed
The internal number of each appearance is also the address of the infringement narrative. If there is no address, it cannot be picked out which image was copied. An image that cannot be picked out is not written as an infringement spread across the whole file. The whole that is written is not treated as proved by a single photograph. Proof is built with the number that matches.
If the applicant later withdraws one appearance, the withdrawal writing should show that number. If it does not, it is not known which unit left the file. An unknown exit does not of itself change the effect of the appearances that remain. An effect that does not change also does not produce a term of protection. The term is not in this text. A term that is not there is not completed from the name of the class. The number may also sit in the margin of the image. A margin that is not written does not complete the claim. A claim that is not completed is not spread across the whole file.
Conclusion
A multiple design is a procedural route for a suitable family of products. It is not treated as having protected every appearance by a single ruling. The appearances are not treated as a single registration ruling. The term of protection is not in this text. The frame is on the intellectual property law page.
The basis is Law No. 6769, the Industrial Property Code.