Legal Process in Lawsuits Filed Due to Unlicensed Software

How does the legal process work in cases filed due to unlicensed software? This comprehensive guide explains the stages of copyright infringement, criminal investigations, triple damages claims, compensation, digital evidence examination, and litigation for companies under the Turkish Copyright Law (FSEK).

In the digital age, software is no longer merely a technical tool; it is a fundamental asset at the heart of commercial activities, corporate organization, and professional production. A vast range of applications, from accounting programs and engineering software to design tools and ERP systems, operate directly through software use. Therefore, lawsuits arising from unlicensed software should not be considered as ordinary contractual disputes, but rather as multi-layered cases involving copyright infringement, damages, criminal liability, and the digital evidence regime. In Turkish law, the current consolidated version of the Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works, including amendments made up to Law No. 7346 dated December 21, 2021, is in effect. Furthermore, with the amendment No. 4110 of 1995, computer programs were explicitly included within the scope of protection, and in the next stage, preparatory designs were also included within this protection, provided they result in a program outcome.

The first fundamental point in this context is this: the right to software, as a rule, belongs to the person who created the work, and this right does not arise from a mandatory registration process. According to the General Directorate of Copyrights of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, voluntary registration is not a document that grants rights; it is a declaration-based process that facilitates the proof of the author's identity, is not mandatory, and does not lead to loss of rights if not done. Therefore, in unlicensed software cases, the defense that "if the software is not registered, no rights can be claimed" does not, by itself, provide a secure basis.

In what situations does an unlicensed software lawsuit arise?

Lawsuits arising from unlicensed software are not limited to the classic use of pirated CDs or cracked programs. In practice, disputes can also arise from using a single-user license on multiple devices, the permanent use of a trial version in commercial activity, continuing to run a program after the subscription period has expired, distributing license keys to group companies or branches, or circumventing the protection mechanism through technical means. The official statement published by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism regarding copyright infringement explicitly lists actions such as processing, reproducing, modifying, distributing, publicly transmitting, and publishing without the written permission of the rights holder; as well as offering for sale, selling, renting, purchasing for commercial purposes, importing or exporting illegally reproduced works, and possessing or storing them for purposes other than personal use. The same statement indicates that the production, offering for sale, or possession (for purposes other than personal use) of programs or technical equipment designed to disable additional programs created to prevent the illegal reproduction of computer programs also falls within the scope of sanctions.

The conclusion is clear: unlicensed software disputes are often not simply a matter of "unpaid software fees." The issue at hand is the use of financial rights to the software beyond the permitted limits. Indeed, the Ministry's statement specifically mentions that either civil or criminal proceedings can be initiated. This demonstrates that unlicensed software can have separate consequences under both civil and criminal law in Turkish law.

How does the process begin before a lawsuit is filed?

In practice, the process often begins with an investigation, inspection, warning notice, or preparation of a complaint. When the rights holder, authorized licensor, or professional association believes that the software is being used without permission, they may send a warning notice to the company before filing a lawsuit; in some cases, they may also apply directly to the prosecutor's office or the civil court. According to the Ministry's statement, in the criminal process, the author, related rights holder, financial rights holder, or authorized professional association applies to the prosecutor's office of the place where the infringement occurred or its consequences arose. Upon complaint, the public prosecutor takes the necessary steps for seizure measures in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the subject matter of the crime. If necessary, a decision may also be made to suspend the activity limited to the reproduction of the works alleged to have been illegally reproduced; however, this decision must be submitted to a judge for approval within twenty-four hours, and if not approved within twenty-four hours, it becomes null and void.

The biggest mistake companies can make at this stage is panicking and trying to delete systems, clear records, or make the programs under audit invisible. This is because technical evidence is often at the heart of disputes involving unlicensed software files. Who used which version, the number of licenses, how long the program has been active, the server or user-based access structure, and the license documents are all considered together. Disorganized interventions at the beginning of the process can weaken subsequent defenses. Since digital evidence can be seized or copied in criminal proceedings, the initial stage must be conducted in a controlled and documented manner.

How does the criminal trial process work?

The legal process for unlicensed software typically begins upon complaint. The Ministry's statement clearly indicates that applications to the prosecutor's office can be made by rights holders or authorized professional associations. This structure demonstrates that unlicensed software is not a simple cybercrime that is prosecuted ex officio; rather, it is a copyright complaint process in which the rights holder plays an active role. Following a complaint, the prosecutor's office may take steps, depending on the specifics of the case, including technical investigation, digital verification, seizure of assets, and, if necessary, suspension of operations.

One of the most important tools in criminal investigations is Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271. According to this article, if there are strong grounds for suspicion based on concrete evidence in an investigation into a crime, and if there is no other way to obtain evidence, the judge, or in cases where delay would be detrimental, the public prosecutor, may order a search of the suspect's computers, computer programs, and computer files, the copying of records, and their decryption into text. The prosecutor's decision is submitted to the judge for approval within twenty-four hours; the judge then makes a decision within twenty-four hours at the latest. If the time limit expires or the judge decides otherwise, the copies and decrypted texts are immediately destroyed.

According to the same article, devices may be temporarily seized if the password cannot be decrypted, confidential information cannot be accessed, or the process will take a long time. However, once the decryption is complete and the necessary copies are made, the seized devices must be returned without delay. In addition, all data in the system is backed up; a copy of the backup is given to the suspect or their representative, and this is recorded in a report. Copies of all or part of the data can also be made without seizure. This regime shows that the criminal process for unlicensed software files often proceeds with a focus on technical expertise and digital data.

The central argument in a criminal case is whether the company or the user reproduced, possessed, stored, or utilized means to circumvent the protection measures of the software without the written permission of the rights holder. The defense often raises objections such as the existence of a valid license, usage within the scope of the contract, the number of users identified not reflecting reality, or the program being kept for trial/testing purposes. However, the success of these objections depends on their support with technical records and contractual documents.

How does the legal process work?

Legal cases arising from unlicensed software often have more severe financial consequences than criminal proceedings. The official statement from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism clearly lists three main categories of legal cases: claims for compensation under Article 68 of the Copyright Law, actions to prevent infringement, and damages claims. According to the same statement, the author of an unlicensed work can claim up to three times the amount they would have requested if a contract had been made, or the fair market value determined according to the law. Therefore, it should be particularly emphasized that obtaining a license later does not eliminate the economic risk incurred in the past in unlicensed software disputes.

An injunction lawsuit aims to prevent the infringement. This means the rights holder doesn't just demand monetary compensation; they also request the cessation of unlicensed use, the removal of the program from systems, and an end to the unlawful use. If the software is a core part of the company's workflow, this type of lawsuit can have extremely disruptive consequences. For example, if an engineering office uses design software, an accounting firm uses commercial accounting software, or a manufacturing company uses ERP infrastructure, stopping its use directly impacts the company's operational capacity. Therefore, the Ministry's designation of the injunction lawsuit as a separate legal avenue is very important in practice.

Compensation lawsuits encompass both moral and material damages. The Ministry's statement indicates that moral damages can be claimed for illegalities such as the failure to mention the author's name or the alteration of the work; and for financial rights violations such as dissemination, reproduction, performance, and public transmission, a sum proportional to the damage suffered and loss of profit can be demanded. Furthermore, it is stated that in cases of infringement of moral and financial rights, the profit obtained by the person acting illegally can also be claimed; however, according to Article 68 of the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, the amount claimed will be deducted from this sum. This shows that in unlicensed software cases, not only the missing license fee but also the commercial benefit and the economic advantage gained can be the subject of discussion.

Why is demanding three times the price so important?

In lawsuits filed due to unlicensed software, the most striking aspect is the claim known in practice as "triple compensation." The official Ministry statement clearly indicates that, according to Article 68 of the Copyright Law, the rights holder can claim up to three times the amount they would have requested if a contract had been made, or the current market value. This mechanism provides a stricter and more deterrent protection than the classic damages calculation. Because the rights holder is not always obligated to claim only the missing license fee; the law allows for a higher amount to be claimed.

This risk is particularly high with enterprise software. Because the licensing fees for CAD, CAM, BIM, ERP, database, design, media production, or industry-specific enterprise software are high, a three-fold cost calculation can create significant compensation pressure on the company. Therefore, in cases involving unlicensed software, the litigation strategy is not solely based on the question of "did we use the program or not?"; it is also shaped by questions such as "what would the hypothetical license fee have been, what was the usage period, what was the number of users and devices, and what kind of commercial benefit did this usage provide to the company?" Much of this is clarified through expert analysis.

Why do expert opinions and evidence analysis determine the fate of a case?

Unlike classic debt collection cases, unlicensed software lawsuits rely heavily on technical evidence. Determining the specific version of the program, who owns the license key, how many devices the same key was used on, when the subscription started or ended, how many users were granted access on the server side, and whether the security mechanism was breached often requires expert examination. In criminal investigations, copies obtained under Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and in civil cases, license documents and internal company inventories, become the primary materials for this examination.

Therefore, when a lawsuit is filed, the first major battle between the parties is at the level of evidence. The rights holder tries to demonstrate that the use was unauthorized and outside the scope of the law; the defendant tries to prove that the use was licensed or legally acquired, or at least that the alleged scope is incorrect. The current structure in Turkish law makes a well-documented company stronger. The more organized the invoices, contracts, license certificates, subscription screenshots, user matching records, and IT inventory, the stronger the defense. Lack of documentation, on the other hand, often turns into a weakness that is interpreted against the company.

What are the most critical stages of the litigation process for companies?

From a company's perspective, the first critical stage in an unlicensed software lawsuit is receiving the allegation. This can take the form of a warning notice, a summons from the prosecutor's office, or a court subpoena. At this stage, reflexively deleting programs, hastily giving instructions to employees, or trying to obscure past usage is extremely dangerous. This is because, while digital copying and seizure are possible in criminal cases, the extent of past usage can be determined by an expert witness in civil cases. The correct approach is to subject the current situation to internal audit, create a software inventory, gather the contract set, and jointly establish the defense position with the technical and legal teams.

The second critical stage is determining the strategy according to the type of legal action. If the case is criminal, the scope of the complaint, the prosecution's procedures, the risk of seizure, and the technical examination become prominent. If the case is civil, the scope of the claims for injunctive relief, damages, and triple compensation becomes decisive. In some cases, both processes run simultaneously. Therefore, the company's approach of "let's finish the criminal investigation first, then we'll deal with the civil case" is not always correct. In most cases, the two processes reinforce each other; digital evidence collected in the criminal investigation can affect the course of the civil case.

The third critical stage is the possibility of compromise or settlement. Not every case needs to end with a court decision. However, if settlement negotiations are to be held in unlicensed software cases, the true extent of the exposure must first be understood in order for the negotiations to be fruitful. The rights holder's claim may be technically too broad; however, a licensing violation may be larger than the company anticipated. Therefore, settlement should not be merely a financial negotiation; it should be a legal decision that considers the evidentiary, criminal, and compensation aspects of the case together. The fact that the Ministry indicates both criminal and civil avenues for the same type of case already confirms this multi-faceted structure.

What do precautionary measures and suspension of activity mean?

One of the most powerful pressure tools in unlicensed software cases is temporary injunctions that directly affect the workflow. On the criminal side, the prosecutor may order a stay of activity limited to the reproduction of the works alleged to have been illegally reproduced; this decision is submitted to the judge for approval shortly thereafter. On the civil side, injunctions and related requests for temporary protection aim to prevent the continuation of unlicensed use. As a result, the company may become unable to use certain software even before a final judgment is rendered.

This possibility is particularly important when the software carries files that support the company's core operations. Because paying compensation at the end of a lawsuit is one thing, but disrupting the workflow during the lawsuit is another. If an architectural firm depends on design files, a manufacturing company on ERP workflows, or an accounting firm on business software infrastructure, the economic impact of temporary interference is directly amplified. Therefore, when an unlicensed software lawsuit is filed, the defense must be based not only on "justification" but also on "continuity of operation.".

Conclusion

In lawsuits arising from unlicensed software, the legal process cannot be explained by a single-dimensional case diagram. The process often begins with an initial detection, warning, or complaint; this is followed by a criminal investigation, collection of digital evidence, prosecution procedures, and, if necessary, a cessation of activity. Simultaneously or subsequently, a civil lawsuit may be filed demanding triple compensation, injunctive relief, material and moral damages, and transfer of profits. The fact that software is a work of art, that rights accrue to the author, and that registration is not mandatory, strengthens the rights holder's protection in these cases.

Therefore, the most appropriate approach for companies is not to panic and produce defenses after a lawsuit is filed, but to manage software usage from the outset with a license inventory, contract discipline, and internal audits. Even if a lawsuit has been filed, the first thing to do is not to destroy the evidence, but to firmly establish the current situation and realistically measure the legal exposure. Lawsuits concerning unlicensed software are often more expensive and technical than one might think; however, if not managed with proper documentation and the right strategy, they can have far more serious consequences.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a case of unlicensed software only a civil lawsuit?
No. According to the Ministry's official statement, both civil and criminal lawsuits can be filed in cases of copyright infringement.

Can the prosecutor's office examine company computers?
Yes, but the conditions in Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be met. Search, copying, and, if necessary, seizure are possible only if there is strong suspicion based on concrete evidence and if evidence cannot be obtained otherwise.

Does the rights holder only want the license fee?
No. If a contract had been made under Article 68 of the Turkish Copyright Law, they could have requested up to three times the amount or the market value; furthermore, claims for compensation and profit transfer may also arise.

Can a lawsuit be filed if there is no registration?
No. Voluntary registration is not a mandatory process that grants rights; it is a process that facilitates proof. The right arises with the person who created the work.

Does purchasing a license later completely eliminate past risk?
As a rule, no. Legal and criminal risks arising from past usage may still exist; in particular, claims for triple the amount and damages may be based on past usage.