Opening a social media account in his name and using his photos without the person’s consent constitutes a crime of “illegally giving or taking data.” You can look at the example Supreme Court decision.
12. Criminal Department
Base Number : 2014/19526
Decision Number : 2015/3184
“text of jurisprudence”
Court :Criminal Court Of First Instance
Crime : illegally giving or seizing data
Verdict: Acquittal
The verdict on the acquittal of the accused for illegally giving or seizing the data was considered necessary by the participant on appeal, examining the file:
Rejection of other appeals of the participant, but;
According to the file scope; the defendant was involved with the victims …’s work for a while belonging to the same shipping company knew each other from working together at the defendant’s business, the place of departure in the period of the named defendant used his Facebook account as your profile picture … a picture of the victim’s facebook account, “Hey, Lady, How Are you?”and “when a person is so beautiful, he doesn’t answer, and you’re right.”after sending two messages dated 16.09.2013 in the form, the victim, the witness who owns the workplace …’called the defendant and asked him to find out if he had anything to do with the incident, in accordance with the request of the victim, Around 10.00 am on 17.09.2013, the witness who called the defendant on the phone …passed the matter to the defendant and stated that the defendant had nothing to do with the Facebook account called … ; however Facebook facebook facebook facebook account about 2 hours after this phone call, … the profile picture of the defendant was removed, the profile landscape picture was put and the same day around 13.00 hours, the victim went to work, arguing with him, … the name of the defendant is not the owner of the Facebook account and Facebook social networking site belonging to others can easily open fake accounts with pictures of the victim using the Facebook profile picture of the victim “…” ,
The victim, the defendant used a picture of who owns the work place primarily in relation to the witness named … your Facebook account from a telephone call from the defendant, the event has something to do with when you are considering whether you want to know, who opened fake Facebook profile and public Facebook users with accounts in stages by using a picture of the victim, in essence, unchanging, sincere statements and in the workplace after discussion, the defendant himself “I’ll open 10 separate facebook account for your pic, you will see it.”in recognition of the superiority of his statements that he said words in the form, 136/1 of the TCK(Criminal Law) due to the actions of the accused who presents the victim’s personal data picture to the manners of others through his Facebook account “…” without his consent. in accordance with Article 223/2-c of the CMK, the defendant should be acquitted on Written grounds that do not correspond to the scope of the file, regardless of whether the defendant’s motive does not matter, while the defendant’s defense to save him from punishment should be decided.,
It is against the law, and since the appeals of the participant are considered in place in this respect, the provision is therefore 8 of law 5320. article 321 of Cmuk(Criminal Procedures Law) No. 1412, which is still being implemented in accordance with article. it was unanimously decided on 23.02.2015 to overturn the request in accordance with the article.
