In short
If a product photograph appears on a rival site, the price of the order does not by itself assign the right in the shoot. The right holder reads the photography contract and the frame on the rival page side by side. If the contract does not write an assignment, the photograph can remain with the person who took it. If the frame you use stands identically on someone else's page, that overlap is described separately. Photographing the same goods in another light is not, by itself, a copy.
The contract price does not build an assignment
The price of the shoot speaks of the work of photographing. The right passing to you is a separate sentence. If there is no sentence, the price does not take the place of an assignment. The contract is a document. Which economic right passed, and for which frame, should stand separately in the text. A sentence of "all rights" does not by itself carry to the buyer a right that is not listed. That a photograph belongs, as a rule, to the person who took it is a separate article. That rule is not rebuilt here. What is read is who took the frame in your hands, and whether the same frame stands on the rival page.
An invoice can show the price of the shoot. An invoice does not take the place of an assignment sentence. If a minute writes the delivery, it is placed beside the contract. The minute does not assign a right that is not listed. An application or a registry entry does not pass to the publisher a right that is not written in the contract. The petition describes the contract in hand and the rival page. The petition does not turn the order into an assignment. Service shows which frame the letter that went to the other party relates to. Without service, the scope is not completed from here.
The rival page and the overlap
A screenshot becomes a document if it carries the address and the date. The frame may have been cropped, or writing may have been placed on it. Cropping does not pass the right in the shoot to the rival. Photographing the same product in another light may not be a copy of your file. The distinction is in the image itself. One does not say the same goods are enough before the pixels and the composition are described. A copy of the page text is read separately as the appearance of the site. An image in a marketplace listing can also enter a separate record. Unauthorised sharing of a work is not always another name for this shop-window frame. The shape of the packaging is not a copy of the photograph file. The decision is built if the contract and the screen are there. Without the screen, a copy is not declared.
If the person who took the photograph and the company that runs the site are different, the addressee is the trade name of the page that published the frame. The name of the person who took it does not, in every file, take the place of permission to publish. The seller's trade name under the page may not be the same as the company in the domain name. The difference stands in the screen record. Not every file carries the same contract. A year or a rate is not fixed here. If a term is written in the contract, it is read from there. If it is not written, it is not added from here.
If the photography contract has a list of frames, only the frames on the list are discussed. If there is no list, the whole archive is not treated as assigned. The frame on the rival page may not be in the same crop as the frame on the list. A difference of crop does not by itself cause the overlap to be treated as absent. The overlap is described from the image itself. If a watermark was removed, the removal does not pass the right to the rival. A watermark does not take the place of the contract either. If a stock code or a product name is written under the frame, that writing stands in the screen record. The writing does not assign the right in the shoot. Another photographer may have photographed the same stock code. The question whether that shoot is a copy of your file is asked if the two images stand side by side. Without the image, a decision of copying is not built. The page coming down from publication does not mean the copy never appeared. If the screen from before it came down is there, that screen is read.
A Çankaya address does not choose the frame
Counsel in Ankara who asks whose right passed does not change the competent authority from the address of the office in Çankaya. The name of the district is not written in place of a party to the photography contract, or of the publisher's trade name. The competent place is read from the dispute's own rule. The door of the office does not turn the order price into a decision of assignment.
How the frame is read from the contract
If the photography contract and the rival page are there, the file is read from there. The order price is not treated as an assignment. Another shoot of the same goods is not treated as a copy by itself.
Conclusion
What is looked at in a product photograph is the overlap of the photography contract and the frame on the rival page. The order price does not build an assignment. A photograph remaining with the person who took it is in the article on copyright in a photograph. A copy of the page text is in the article on the appearance of a site. An image in a marketplace listing is under a counterfeit listing, and sharing of a work is under a work. The frame is on the intellectual property page. The official basis is the Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works.