Rights to Service-Related Works and Inventions in Türkiye
1) Who owns the rights to service-related works and service inventions created by an employee in the course of their employment?
Under Article 18/2 of the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846 (“Law No. 5846”), the employee remains the author of a work created in the performance of their duties, while the employer is entitled to exercise the economic rights unless otherwise agreed or required by the nature of the work. Moral rights remain with the employee and cannot be transferred.
For service inventions, the employee must notify the employer in accordance with Articles 113 et seq. of the Industrial Property Law No. 6769 (“Law No. 6769”). The employer may claim full or partial rights within four months; otherwise, the invention becomes a free invention. A full-rights claim transfers the rights in the invention to the employer, while the employee retains their status as inventor and the right to statutory compensation.
2) What criteria determine whether a work or invention qualifies as service-related?
An invention qualifies as a service invention if it is made during the employment relationship and results from the employee’s assigned duties or is based to a significant extent on the enterprise’s experience or activities. The time and place of creation are relevant but are not decisive on their own. Use of the employer’s equipment, information or other resources may support the classification, but does not automatically make the invention service-related. A work falls within Article 18/2 of Law No. 5846 where it is created by the employee in the performance of their duties and has a functional connection with their work. Works and inventions falling outside these criteria generally remain with the employee.
3) Which rights automatically vest in the employer and which require a separate assignment?
For works created in the performance of an employee’s duties, Article 18/2 of Law No. 5846 gives the employer the statutory authority to exercise the economic rights, rather than transferring authorship or ownership of those rights to the employer. Moral rights remain with the employee and cannot be assigned, although specific consents may be obtained for particular uses where legally permissible. Works created outside the employee’s duties, as well as works produced by independent contractors or freelancers, require a written assignment identifying each economic right separately under Article 52. For service inventions, a full-rights claim transfers all rights in the invention to the employer. A partial-rights claim gives the employer only the rights covered by that claim, while free inventions require a separate agreement.
4) Is an employer required to compensate an employee for a service invention or service-related work?
An employer that claims full rights over a service invention must pay the employee reasonable compensation under the Industrial Property Law No. 6769 and the applicable Employee Inventions Regulation. The amount is determined by considering factors such as the economic value of the invention, the employee’s duties and contribution, and the enterprise’s contribution and resources. Where the employer makes a partial-rights claim, compensation may also become payable if the employer uses the invention. The employee’s statutory compensation rights should not be excluded in advance by a general waiver or an unreasonably disadvantageous contractual provision. Law No. 5846 does not provide an equivalent mandatory additional royalty for service-related works, although additional payment may be agreed in an employment agreement, collective agreement or workplace practice.
5) What documents should be put in place to establish and protect an employer’s rights to service-related works and service inventions? What intellectual property provisions should be included in an employment agreement?
The employer should maintain a written employment agreement and a clear job description identifying the employee’s duties and responsibilities. The documents should also regulate invention notification, the employer’s four-month claim procedure, compensation, confidentiality, record-keeping and cooperation in patent applications. For works created outside the employee’s duties, or by contractors and freelancers, a separate written assignment should identify each economic right individually in accordance with Article 52 of Law No. 5846. The agreement may define the intended methods, territory and duration of use and may include specific consents concerning the exercise of moral rights, but should not purport to transfer the moral rights themselves. A blanket present assignment of unidentified future works is ineffective, although a written undertaking to transfer the relevant economic rights after the work is created may be valid.
6) How are rights to service-related works and service inventions allocated within multinational corporate groups and in cross-border employment relationships?
Under Turkish law, in the case of works created within the scope of employment, the employer is entitled under Article 18/2 of the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works (FSEK) merely to exercise the economic rights; the moral rights remain vested in the employee as the author, and pursuant to Article 52 FSEK the economic rights subject to transfer must be individually enumerated in the agreement. As regards service inventions, the employee is obliged under Article 114 of the Industrial Property Law (SMK) to notify the invention to the employer in writing and without delay, and the employer must assert a full or partial claim in writing within four months from the date on which the notification reaches it, in accordance with Article 115 SMK; failing this, the invention acquires the status of a free invention. Since the employee's right to remuneration is of a mandatory nature, it cannot be waived in advance.
In cross-border relationships, ownership of rights is governed, by virtue of the principle of territoriality, by the law of the country for which protection is sought (lex loci protectionis). As for the employment relationship, although a choice of law is permitted under Article 27 of the Turkish Act on Private International Law and Procedural Law (MÖHUK), such choice may not deprive the employee of the minimum protection afforded by the mandatory provisions of the law of the habitual place of work. Accordingly, the right to remuneration of an employee habitually working in Türkiye cannot be set aside by a group framework agreement governed by foreign law.
7) What risks arise if an employment agreement does not contain provisions governing service-related works and service inventions?
Under Turkish law, silence on the part of the employment agreement confines the employer to the minimum protection afforded by laws. In respect of works created within the scope of employment, the employer acquires no more than the authority to exercise the economic rights; as this does not constitute an assignment, the employer may neither transfer the work to group companies or third parties. The scope of that authority is likewise limited to works produced by the employee in the performance of their duties, so that ownership becomes contentious as regards output falling outside the job description. Remedying the omission at a later stage requires an agreement in writing enumerating the rights individually, which may prove impracticable if the employee refuses or has already left the company.
As regards service inventions, the statutory regime applies even in the absence of an agreement; however, where no contractual notification and monitoring mechanism has been put in place, there is a risk that the four-month period for asserting a claim will be missed and that the invention will become a free invention vesting entirely in the employee. Where the remuneration and the manner of its payment have not been agreed in advance, this entails an unforeseeable and generally higher cost for the employer.
8) Can an employee claim rights to a work or invention created outside working hours using the employer’s resources or while working remotely?
Under Turkish law the decisive criterion is not the working hours or the place where the work was carried out, but its connection with the employee's duty to perform work and with the resources of the undertaking. Remote working, as defined in Article 14 of the Labour Law, is the performance of that duty outside the workplace but within the organisation established by the employer, and therefore does not alter the position on ownership.
As regards inventions, Article 113 SMK lays down two alternative criteria: an invention is a service invention where it is made in the performance of the employee's assigned activity, or where it is made during the employment relationship largely on the basis of the experience and work of the undertaking. The fact that it was made outside working hours or at home does not convert it into a free invention; substantial use of the employer's data, know-how or equipment suffices. In such cases the employee must give notification under Article 114 SMK and the employer may assert a full or partial claim within four months under Article 115 SMK, the employee being entitled in either case to equitable remuneration, which is mandatory in nature. If the employer fails to assert its claim in time or to file a patent application under Article 116 SMK, the invention becomes free and vests entirely in the employee. Where the invention is made independently of the employee's duties and without any contribution from the employer, it is a free invention from the outset, although the notification obligation under Article 119 SMK subsists.
For works, the employer's position is narrower. Article 18/2 FSEK covers only works created "in the performance of the employee's duties" and contains no criterion based on use of the employer's resources, so a work outside the job description remains with the employee unless otherwise agreed, even if produced on company equipment during working hours. Since dispositions concerning works not yet created are invalid under Article 48 FSEK, blanket clauses covering all future works afford only limited protection.
In short, an employee may assert such claims, and the outcome turns on the causal link with the undertaking's contribution in the case of inventions, and on the scope of the job description in the case of works.
9) How can an employer protect its rights when the creator of a service-related work or invention leaves the company?
Under Article 118/4 SMK, the rights and obligations arising from an employee invention are not affected by the termination of the employment contract; this preserves the employer's claim just as much as the employee's entitlement to remuneration. Protection must therefore rest on steps completed before departure rather than on the moment of departure itself.
In the case of inventions, what proves decisive is that the applicable periods have been duly observed: where the four-month full claim under Article 115 SMK and the obligation to file a patent application under Article 116 SMK have not been complied with, the invention becomes a free invention and vests in the departing employee. Agreeing the remuneration in writing within the framework of Article 115/9 SMK may forestall subsequent disputes. The agreement should also provide for a duty of cooperation that survives the termination of the employment relationship.
Finally, since the duty of loyalty under Article 396 of the Turkish Code of Obligations comes to an end together with the employment relationship, post-departure protection derives from the contract alone; the confidentiality clause must be drafted so as to cover that period, and any non-compete undertaking must be agreed within the limits laid down in Articles 444 et seq. of the Turkish Code of Obligations. In practice, the most effective measures are obtaining an invention disclosure statement on exit, listing the works produced and taking delivery of the source code and documentation, and completing the relevant registrations.
10) How does the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems affect the legal treatment of service-related works and service inventions created by employees?
Turkish law contains no specific regulation on the use of artificial intelligence, nor has any settled body of case law yet emerged on the subject. Accordingly, the legal characterisation of works and inventions arising from the use of AI systems is assessed within the framework of the employer-employee relationship, the provisions of the contract and the relevant legislation; as a rule, the use of artificial intelligence does not alter the regime governing works created within the scope of employment or service inventions.
Authors: Kaan Gök, Gülendam Tüylüoğlu, Betül Arslan Aydın, Оsman Aydın
