Copyright & Anti-Piracy in Türkiye

Türkiye sits at the crossroads of Europe and Asia and is home to a large, active market for film, music, publishing, gaming and software. That reach also makes rights holders a frequent target of piracy and unauthorised use. We advise domestic and foreign clients on securing, licensing and enforcing copyright across traditional and digital channels, from a single manuscript or software product to an entire back catalogue distributed across streaming and download platforms.

FSEK also protects related rights (neighbouring rights) belonging to performers, phonogram producers, film producers and broadcasting organisations. These are the rights that let a record label, a studio or a broadcaster control the use of a fixed performance or signal, independently of the underlying work.

Because Türkiye is a party to the Berne Convention, the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the TRIPS Agreement, works by foreign authors receive the same protection as those of Turkish nationals. A film produced in London or software written in Berlin is enforceable in Türkiye without any local formality.

Protection arises automatically the moment an original work is created. There is no mandatory registration, and no copyright notice or © symbol is required for a work to be protected. That said, registration with the Ministry of Culture and Tourism creates reliable, dated evidence of authorship. FSEK Article 13 requires film and phonogram producers to register their productions, expressly without creating any right, and allows authors of any other protected work, including software, to register on request. That record is often the single most valuable thing you can have when ownership is later disputed.

How long does copyright last in Türkiye?

Under FSEK Article 27, protection lasts for the author’s lifetime and 70 years after death. Where a work has several authors, the 70 years run from the death of the last surviving author; a work first made public after the author’s death is protected for 70 years from the death; and where the first author is a legal entity, or the work was published without the author’s name, the term is 70 years from publication. Article 26 adds that terms counted from death or publication start on the first day of the following year. Related rights last 70 years as well under Article 82: for performers from fixation of the performance, for producers from the first fixation, and for broadcasters from the first broadcast.

What this means for you

If you are a creator or a company, the practical takeaway is that you already hold rights, but proving them is a separate question. We help clients build an evidence trail (deposits, dated deliverables, version histories and signed contracts) so that when a dispute arises, ownership is a matter of record rather than argument.

• Economic rights: the rights to reproduce, distribute, perform, adapt and communicate the work to the public, including transmission by digital and on-demand means. These rights are commercial assets: they can be assigned outright or licensed for specific uses, territories and terms.
• Moral rights: including the right to be named as author, the right to decide whether, when and how a work is first disclosed, and the right to object to distortion or mutilation of the work. Moral rights stay with the author and cannot be transferred, even after the economic rights are sold.

Even when you buy every economic right in a work, the author keeps the moral rights, so a valid assignment still needs the author’s cooperation on credit and integrity. Ignore this and a “fully purchased” work can still generate a claim.

Clear, written contracts are not optional. FSEK Article 52 requires that transfers and licences of economic rights be in writing and that they specify each right concerned, a general “all rights” clause can be read narrowly against the buyer. The same rule decides who owns code written by staff and contractors, a question covered in source code ownership and FSEK Article 18 assignments. We draft and review assignment, licensing, publishing, development and commissioning agreements so that ownership, permitted uses, territory, exclusivity and duration are never left ambiguous.

Notice and takedown. Additional Article 4 of FSEK sets out a dedicated procedure for online infringement. Under its third paragraph, the rights holder first applies to the content provider and asks it to stop the infringement within three days. If the infringement continues, the rights holder applies to the public prosecutor, who asks the service provider to suspend, within three days, the service given to the infringing content provider; service resumes once the infringement stops. Speed matters: the earlier you act, the less the material spreads and the stronger your position. Rights holders frequently reach instead for the internet blocking law, which was not built for copyright; the two routes are compared step by step in FSEK Additional Article 4 against the Law 5651 blocking route.

Border and market measures. Customs authorities can detain suspected pirated goods entering or leaving the country, and rights holders can pursue seizure of infringing copies together with the equipment used to produce them. This is particularly effective against counterfeit physical media and packaging.

Before you send a single takedown notice, capture the evidence, full URLs, screenshots, timestamps and copies of the infringing files. Infringers routinely delete content the moment they are contacted, and a claim is only as strong as the proof behind it.

Building an enforcement playbook

For clients with large catalogues we set up a repeatable process: monitoring for infringements, a standard cease-and-desist and takedown template, an escalation path to hosting providers and courts, and a record of every action taken. This turns piracy response from a series of one-off emergencies into a managed, cost-controlled programme.

• Civil remedies: actions to remove infringement (Article 66) and to prevent it (Article 69), claims for material and moral damages, and, against anyone who used the work without written permission, claims for at most three times more than the fee that could have been demanded under a contract or the market fee (Article 68).
• Preliminary measures: under Article 77, injunctions and preservation of infringing copies and the moulds and equipment used to make them, before or after the case is filed, so the damage does not deepen during litigation.
• Criminal remedies: infringement carried out unlawfully can lead to imprisonment and judicial fines, pursued through a criminal complaint filed within the statutory period.

The criminal provisions set fixed ranges. Article 71(1) provides for one to five years’ imprisonment or a judicial fine against anyone who, without written permission, adapts, performs, reproduces, alters, distributes or communicates a work to the public, or offers, sells or distributes unlawfully reproduced copies, or possesses or stores them other than for personal use. Those who remove or alter rights-management information without authority (Additional Article 4(1)) and content providers that continue to infringe face three months to two years’ imprisonment under the penultimate paragraph of Article 71, unless the act forms a more serious offence. Article 72 provides for six months to two years’ imprisonment against those who make, import, distribute, sell, rent or hold for commercial purposes products and tools designed to circumvent effective technological measures such as access control or encryption, or who offer advertising, marketing, design or application services for them. Under Article 75, investigation and prosecution of the offences in Articles 71 and 72 depend on a complaint, supported by documents proving the rights, after which the file follows the general rules of criminal law and procedure.

At a glance, the main enforcement routes compare as follows:

Choosing the right combination matters. A criminal complaint can create pressure and preserve evidence quickly, while the civil route is where damages and lasting injunctions are secured. We advise on the most effective sequence for each case rather than defaulting to litigation.

One point foreign rights holders often miss: the criminal route in copyright cases is complaint-based, so it only moves if the rights holder files within six months of learning of the act and the identity of the infringer (Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237, Article 73). Building the evidence file early, ideally before the infringer knows you are watching, keeps both the civil and criminal options open.

• Registration and portfolio strategy: securing dated evidence of ownership and advising on protection across a body of works
• Contracts: assignment, licensing, publishing, distribution, commissioning and software development agreements, with IP terms that hold up under FSEK
• Enforcement: cease-and-desist letters, takedown and access-blocking requests, and customs actions
• Litigation: civil damages claims, injunctions and criminal complaints before the specialised IP courts

Türkiye’s copyright regime is grounded in longstanding respect for intellectual and artistic works and continues to adapt to digital distribution and emerging technologies. Whether you are protecting a catalogue, negotiating a licence or responding to piracy, we advise on the applicable framework under FSEK and represent rights holders in enforcement and litigation.

• Real Estate & Property Law: Title deed due diligence, foreign property acquisitions, and Land Registry (TKGM) transfers.
• Intellectual Property & Trademark Litigation: Trademark, patent, and copyright enforcement before TÜRKPATENT and IP Courts.
• Personal Data Protection (KVKK/GDPR): VERBİS registration, data inventory mapping, and cross-border data transfer compliance.
• Legal Matters in Istanbul for Foreign Clients and Companies: Full-service commercial and civil advocacy before Istanbul courthouses.