COMBATTING AMBUSH MARKETING IN TÜRKİYE
Introduction
Sponsorship‑based marketing has become integral to contemporary advertising practice, prompting non‑sponsor enterprises to associate themselves with high‑profile sporting events through indirect promotion.
These so‑called ambush marketing strategies can distort consumer perception and erode the exclusive commercial value purchased by official sponsors.
Although Türkiye has not enacted a statute devoted specifically to ambush marketing, the phenomenon is regulated de facto through the interlocking provisions of unfair competition law, consumer‑protection law and intellectual property law.
Ambush marketing denotes any promotional conduct by which an enterprise suggests—expressly or implicitly—that it enjoys an official relationship with a particular sporting event despite holding no formal sponsorship rights.
Such representations dilute the economic worth of sponsorship packages, free‑ride on the organiser’s goodwill and risk misleading the public.
As marketing techniques become increasingly sophisticated, the legal assessment of ambush marketing gains practical significance for practitioners and courts alike.
Conceptual Framework
Ambush marketing may be executed in numerous guises.
A common tactic is the placement of conspicuous advertising in the immediate vicinity of a sporting venue so that spectators associate the advertiser with the event.
Another method involves the unauthorised reproduction of event names, logos or slogans in commercial communications.
Finally, enterprises sometimes orchestrate themed campaigns timed to coincide with a sporting event media cycle, thereby appropriating its atmosphere.
All of these practices exploit the event’s reputation without authorisation and raise serious ethical and legal concerns.
Legal Framework in Türkiye
Turkish Commercial Code
Articles 54 and 55 of the Turkish Commercial Code (No. 6102) set out the general prohibition against unfair competition.
Article 55(1)(a)(5) treats as unfair competition any act that presents one’s goods or services in a manner likely to create a deceptive connection with another enterprise. Ambush marketing, by insinuating sponsorship where none exists, squarely falls within this prohibition.
Consumer Protection Regime
Law No. 6502 on the Protection of Consumers, together with the Regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair Commercial Practices, requires that all advertising be truthful, transparent and non‑misleading.
Where an advertisement falsely implies an official affiliation with a sporting event, it contravenes these legal provisions and may attract administrative sanction.
Intellectual Property Law
Logos, trademarks and other proprietary indicia connected with a sporting event enjoy protection under the Industrial Property Code (No. 6769).
Their unauthorised use in ambush campaigns may constitute trademark infringement, entitling rights holders to injunctive relief and damages.
Enforcement Mechanisms
Advertisement Board
Operating under the Ministry of Trade, the Advertisement Board supervises commercial advertising nationwide.
It possesses statutory authority to suspend deceptive campaigns and to impose administrative fines.
Both measures have been used against ambush marketing found to mislead consumers.
Advertising Self‑Regulatory Board (ROK)
The Advertising Self‑Regulatory Board monitors industry compliance with the ICC (international Chamber of Commerce) Advertising and Marketing Communications Code.
Although the ROK determinations are not legally binding, public reprimands issued by it exert substantial reputational pressure.
The ROK regards any communication that falsely suggests sponsorship as unethical.
Legal Consequences and Sanctions
Ambush marketing can engage several heads of liability under Turkish law.
Affected sporting events organisers or sponsors may pursue cease‑and‑desist orders and compensation on grounds of unfair competition.
The Advertisement Board may levy administrative fines for misleading advertising under Law No. 6502.
Furthermore, unauthorised use of protected indicia can trigger civil—and, in aggravated circumstances, criminal—consequences under trademark law.
These remedies collectively aim to suppress ambush activity and to restore the legal rights compromised by such conduct.
Conclusion
Whilst Türkiye lacks a bespoke statute governing ambush marketing, existing legal norms on unfair competition, consumer protection and intellectual property provide a coherent toolkit for enforcement.
Event organisers and sponsors are, therefore, advised to deploy proactively contractual and compliance strategies and, where necessary, to invoke the courts and administrative bodies to safeguard the exclusivity for which they have paid.
We advise on all legal aspects of ambush marketing in Türkiye and further information is available from the Head of our Türkiye Desk, Att. Gurur Gaye Günal, by emailing her at gunal@valloni.ch.