In short
A collecting society is not the author of the work. It follows the economic rights under the authority the right holder gave. The answer to whether a collecting society owns the copyright is read from the authority document. The society may license and may collect a fee. A receipt for collection does not pass the copyright to the society. Which rights the authority covers, and which place, is read from the document.
The authority document does not stand in for ownership
Membership, or an authority document, gives the society a possibility of representation and of pursuit. A right that is not written in the document does not become the society's property by itself. The author may not be a party to a licence that goes beyond the area for which authority was given. The membership record is not read as an assignment of authorship. If an assignment is wanted, that transaction is a separate contract. Authority to pursue and an assignment contract do not fit on the same paper.
The date of the document does not stand in for the day the work was created. The society follows the rights in the authority document. An economic right that does not stand in the document is not written onto the collection list by itself. A society writing that carries the name of a decision does not change the author either, if it is not a court decision. The reading is made from the wording of the document. An oral reminder does not bring into scope a right that is not in the document.
One co-owner's record does not assign the other
If there is more than one right holder, each person's authority stands separately. One co-owner's registration with the society does not assign the other co-owner's economic right to the society. Because one of the co-owners may grant a licence, the share of the co-owner who did not grant it does not pass to the society by itself. A separate authority document, or a record that binds that person, is looked for for each right holder. One signature is not written in place of the other signature.
Plural ownership of the work does not mean that the society is the sole owner. If a distribution is to be made, the fee goes to the right holders inside the scope of the authority. An internal distribution rate is not a figure here. If the rate stands in the document or in the society's own rules, it is read from there. This text does not invent a percentage. A receipt is not a decision that announces the rate.
Collection does not create the work
The society taking a fee from a user does not mean that the society created the work. The fee is collected to be distributed to the right holders inside the scope of the authority. The receipt does not show that the work was created by the society. The user looks at the limit of the licence taken from the society. The licence does not cover an economic right for which there is no authority. A moral right is not assigned by this authority either.
An authority document does not make the society the author. An office in Çankaya does not choose the competent court or the society's centre. The district of the office does not widen the geographical limit of the licence either. The competent place, and the place of the authority, are read from the record in the document. The name of a district does not stand in for authorship.
A licence does not cover the moral right
The licence text is limited to the economic rights in the authority document. A use that does not stand in the text is not treated as licensed. A moral right does not pass to the society with this authority to pursue. The author still stands separately as to the moral right. In an unauthorised use on the internet, from whom what is asked is the article that comes after the question of ownership is finished. A pattern of infringement is not built before ownership is finished.
The writing between the user and the society is not the right holder's assignment contract. The two papers may stand side by side. One shows the limit of pursuit and of the licence. The other shows an assignment of the economic right. In a mixed file, which paper was signed is read first. If there is no signature, it is not said that the society is the owner.
If the signature is on a given paper, the authority is limited to the wording of that paper. If the wording is silent, the right is not brought into scope. A receipt is not an assignment contract that widens this wording.
How the limit of authority is read from the document
The limit is in the wording of the authority document. A membership record is not counted as an assignment of the work. A collection receipt is not counted as a decision on ownership either. A right that is not written does not enter the scope. A distribution rate is not a figure in this text.
Conclusion
A collecting society follows the rights under an authority document. It does not become the author. Collection does not pass the copyright to the society. Assignment of the economic right is in the assignment contract, the moral right is in moral rights, and the frame of the work is in copyright. Unauthorised sharing is under sharing of the work. The frame is on the intellectual property page. The basis is the text of Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works. It is not said that the society is the owner before the scope of the authority document has been read.