Copyright is one of the most common legal exposures a news site faces: a photo pulled from somewhere, an entire opinion column, or an unlicensed music track can quietly turn into the subject of an infringement claim. This guide explains what copyright is and where to be careful in day-to-day news production, within the framework of Turkish law.
What Is Copyright?
Copyright is the bundle of rights granted to the person who creates a work (the author) over that work. In Turkey, this area is governed by Law No. 5846 (FSEK). The core logic is simple: protection arises automatically the moment a work is created. It does not depend on registration, deposit, or adding a © symbol. So the assumption that "there is no registration, therefore it is free to use" is wrong.
What is protected is not the idea itself, but its original expression. The fact that an event happened is available to everyone; but the sentences a reporter wrote about it, the photo they took, and the video they edited are protected as the author's expression. This distinction sets the line between quoting and copying on a news site.
The Turkish Framework: FSEK No. 5846
FSEK defines a "work" as any intellectual or artistic product that bears the individual character of its author and falls into one of the statutory categories (literary and scientific works, musical works, works of fine art, or cinematographic works). Two elements are required for protection: the content must carry the author's originality, and it must fall into one of the named categories. An ordinary text that anyone would produce in the same way may not clear this threshold.
The law also sets presumptions of authorship. Under FSEK Article 11, a person whose name appears as the author on published copies is presumed to be the author until proven otherwise. For content published without a byline, the counterparty is often the publisher or the party that reproduced it.
Which Content Counts as a Work?
Most of what a news site produces and uses falls within copyright once the conditions are met. The table below summarizes the main statutory categories against their equivalents in news production.
| Category (FSEK) | News equivalent | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Literary and scientific works | News copy, opinion columns, interviews, analysis | Protected when it carries original expression, not raw facts |
| Works of fine art | Photos, infographics, illustrations, logos | Photographs often enjoy separate, strong protection |
| Cinematographic works | News video, short documentary, edits | Image and sound are assessed together |
| Musical works | Intro music, background beds, songs used | Composition, lyrics, and the recording/production can each be protected |
| Adaptations and compilations | Roundups, translations, data-journalism tables | The adapter's contribution is also protected; the original author's rights remain |
Moral Rights and Economic Rights
FSEK groups the author's rights in two. Moral rights are tied to the author's personality and cannot be transferred; economic rights represent commercial value and can be assigned or licensed by contract. Moral rights are the ones news sites overlook most: even after paying to use a photo, failing to credit the author or altering the work beyond recognition can be a separate infringement.
| Group | Example powers | Transferable? |
|---|---|---|
| Moral rights | Disclosure to the public, attribution (credit), objecting to distortion | No (tied to the person) |
| Economic rights | Reproduction, distribution, performance, adaptation, communication to the public (online) | Yes (by contract/license) |
How Long Does Protection Last?
As a rule, protection lasts for the author's lifetime plus 70 years after death. For works with multiple authors, the term runs from the death of the last surviving author. Once the term expires, the work enters the public domain and can be used freely. But being "old" does not automatically make a work free: you need to confirm the term has genuinely lapsed and whether a new adaptation (for example, a restored edition) has created fresh protection of its own.
The Key Exception for News Sites: Daily News
FSEK Article 36 allows daily news and reports disseminated to the public by press or radio to be freely quoted. The key, again, is that what is protected is the expression, not the underlying fact. No one can monopolize a factual report such as "a fire broke out in that district last night"; that information can be passed on freely.
This freedom does not, however, extend to copying another journalist's commentary, analysis, or opinion column verbatim. Article 36 also carries a duty to cite the source: the publication the content was taken from must be named, and if that publication itself took the item from another source (for example, a news agency), that source must be named too.
The Freedom to Quote and Its Limits
FSEK Article 35 permits quotation from disclosed works under certain conditions. For a news site, the practical principles are:
- Quotation must stay within the extent the purpose justifies; republishing an entire piece under the label of a "quote" is copying, not quotation.
- The source and, where possible, the author's name must be clearly stated.
- A quote should support your own original content, not form the main body of the piece.
- Citing the source does not replace permission; even with a credit, republishing a whole work without consent can be an infringement.
Images, Photos, and Video
Photos and video are the highest-risk area on news sites, because the free quotation of text does not cover them. Even when an agency feed sends a photo alongside the text, the photo is governed by its own regime and needs a separate basis. Images from sources like Getty, Shutterstock, or AA are bound by their contract/license terms; downloading an image that appears in a search engine does not grant a right to use it.
- Store the source and license basis for every image with the content (who, which license, which channel).
- When publishing a person's image, separately assess FSEK's provisions on pictures and portraits, as well as personality rights.
- If you use a "representative image," say so; presenting it as footage of the actual event creates separate liability.
Audio and Music
Using background music in video news is a risk most editors miss. A single track carries several layers of rights: the copyright in the composition and the lyrics, plus the related (neighbouring) rights in the recording itself. Using even "a few seconds" of a popular song can be infringing if it is unlicensed. The safe path is to use royalty-free libraries or tracks with a clear license. As with unlicensed software, "free" content of uncertain origin often carries a hidden legal cost.
Licensing and Creative Commons
Because economic rights can be transferred by contract, the cleanest route to using content is a clear license. Creative Commons (CC) licenses are common here, but not every CC license permits the same thing.
| License | What it means | News-site caution |
|---|---|---|
| CC BY | Free with attribution | You must credit the author |
| CC BY-SA | Attribution + share alike | You may have to release your derivative under the same license |
| CC BY-NC | Attribution + no commercial use | Ad-supported news sites risk being treated as "commercial" |
| CC BY-ND | Attribution + no derivatives | You cannot crop, edit, or re-arrange the work |
Consequences of Infringement
Infringement can trigger both civil and criminal consequences. FSEK gives the rights holder distinct routes to stop the infringement, remove its effects, and claim damages. The table below summarizes the main headings.
| Route | What it provides |
|---|---|
| Prevention / removal of infringement | Stopping the infringement and undoing its effects (FSEK Art. 66 et seq.) |
| Pecuniary/moral damages | Compensation for the loss suffered; the law contains provisions that strengthen the rights holder's claim |
| Criminal process | Complaint-based investigation and prosecution under FSEK's penal provisions |
One important detail: for a removal claim, if the infringement was committed by an enterprise's employees, the enterprise owner can also be pursued. So "an editor uploaded it by mistake" does not by itself cancel claims against the organization. Copyright infringement can also lead to takedown requests and lost visibility on the search-engine side.
An Editorial Checklist
- Is this text original, or does it repeat another outlet's expression? Did I separate fact from expression?
- Do I have a valid license/permission basis for every image and video, and did I record its source?
- I did not assume that a credit removes the need for permission, did I?
- Is the music in any video/audio royalty-free or licensed?
- Are the software and plugins I use licensed? (See our guide to nulled software for tools of uncertain origin.)
- Are the rights to images and text in sponsored content clean? (See the sponsored-post guide.)
AI-Generated Content
A question that is becoming common in newsrooms is the copyright status of AI-generated text and images. This area is not yet legally settled and varies from country to country. There are two distinct risks. First, the data used to train the model and the output it produces may resemble someone else's work; second, it is unclear whether wholly machine-generated content has an "author" at all, and therefore whether you can claim rights based on it. The safe approach is to treat AI output as a draft to be checked rather than a verified source, and never to reproduce recognizable works belonging to third parties.
The International Dimension
Copyright protection is not confined to national borders. Turkey is a party to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, so foreign works are largely protected domestically and no registration is required. The practical upshot: a photo on a foreign site being "outside Turkey" does not make it free; permission or a license is essential for cross-border content use too.