In short
Invalidity of a trade mark is a decision asked from the court so that the protection of a registered mark is treated as never having arisen. If there is an absolute or a relative ground of refusal, the court can decide on invalidity. The question of how an action for invalidity of a trade mark is brought does not announce the owner and the list of goods if the register extract does not stand.
The Turkish Patent and Trademark Office is not shown as a party in this action. The defendant is the person who appears as the right holder on the register. Bringing the mark down because it was not used is a request for cancellation made to the Office. Five years of non-use is cancellation. It is not invalidity. A time for usurpation is not on the file, and it is not added.
Against whom the action is brought
The action is brought against the person who appears as the owner of the mark on the register, or against their legal successor. Those who have an interest, public prosecutors, and the relevant public institutions can make the request. If the ground of invalidity relates to a part of the mark, the decision can also stay limited to that good or service. A decision of invalidity that changes the specimen of the mark itself is not given. The petition does not turn the sign on the register into another sign.
An action brought against the Office's own transaction is not mixed with this action. The route against an Office decision is read separately. In invalidity the competent court is read according to the defendant's residence and the rule of special jurisdiction. If service goes to the defendant from an address, that address is compared with the register. If the addresses conflict, both are stated, and one is not erased. An opposition at the application stage does not itself turn into this action after registration. The opposition petition is not a draft of the petition for invalidity.
Non-use is cancellation
Serious non-use is a ground of cancellation asked from the Office. Five years of non-use is the time written on the file. This time is not read as the time of the invalidity action. If the two requests are melted into the same petition, the wrong door is opened on the register. A document of use, an invoice, and a catalogue are evidence of the discussion of non-use. If there is no document, use is not treated as existing. The year of non-use is not extended by adding a new year outside these five years.
Usurpation is the discussion of having someone else's mark registered in one's own name. The time of usurpation is not written on the file. This note does not set that time either. A claim of bad faith is not built by adding a time. If there is bad faith, the basis is the date of use and the register record. If there is no date, a time of usurpation is not invented. Cancellation and invalidity are not the same word. One is the Office's door. The other is the court's door.
The effect of the decision runs to the application date
A decision of invalidity produces a result from the application date of the mark. The protection the statute provides is treated as never having arisen. A decision of cancellation is, as a rule, effective from the date the request was submitted to the Office. Melting the two results into the same petition produces the wrong date on the register. Before the decision becomes final, the register is not treated as having changed on its own. If the register extract shows the annotation of the decision, the annotation is read from there. If it does not show it, an annotation is not added.
A sign that later gained distinctiveness through use may not be invalidated in some paragraphs of absolute refusal. This exception does not save every similar word. The evidence of use should belong to a time before the day of invalidity. If the date of the evidence is missing, the exception is not treated as having been applied. Partial invalidity speaks of a part of the list of goods. The whole of the list is not written as if it had been erased by a partial decision. The basis is Articles 25 and 27 of Law No. 6769. This note does not add a new article number.
A Çankaya address does not choose the court
A lawyer in Ankara does not write the office's Çankaya address in place of the court. The competent authority is read from the defendant's residence and from the rule of special jurisdiction. A time of usurpation is not added so that the action itself passes. The district of the office does not change the authority of the invalidity action. A district name does not stand in for the right holder on the register.
How the register is read
A time of usurpation that is not on the file is not added, and five years of non-use is read apart as cancellation. Non-use is not counted as a ground of invalidity.
Conclusion
The answer to how an action for invalidity of a trade mark is brought is that a registered mark is discussed in court and according to grounds of refusal. The Office is not a party. Five years of non-use sits at the door of cancellation. A time of usurpation is not written. Opposition to publication sits under opposition, non-use under cancellation, registration under registration, and an Office decision under an action against the Office. The frame sits on the intellectual property page. The basis is Articles 25 and 27 of the Industrial Property Code No. 6769.