Israel
Legal background
| Copyright legislation | Copyright Act 2008 ("CA") | |||||
| Patent legislation | ||||||
| Other relevant laws | E-commerce act proposal 2008 ("ECP") ("ECP") | |||||
| Borochof Arnon Vs. Poran Elishay ("Borochof") | ||||||
| Yizhak Sudri Vs. Arnon Shtellreed ("Sudri") | ||||||
| Ariel City council Vs. Walla communications ("Ariel") | ||||||
| Eliyahu Vs. Lebowitz ("Eliyahu") | ||||||
| David Geva Vs. Walt Disney ("Geva") | ||||||
| Premier League Vs. John Doe ("PL") | ||||||
| Maariv Vs. Shochat ("Maariv") | ||||||
| NMC Vs. Holon Municipality ("Holon") | ||||||
| Biton Vs. Sultan ("Biton") | ||||||
| Israeli federation for records and cassettes Vs. Antitrust regulator ("IFRC") | ||||||
| Shoken Vs. Hebrew Univiersity Jerusalem (pending) ("Shoken") | ||||||
| Empty Cassettes Act ("ECA") | ||||||
| Copyright treaties | Berne Convention | Rome Convention | Berne Appendix | TRIPS | WIPO Internet treaties | Paris Convention |
| Other treaties and trade agreements | ||||||
Scope and duration of copyright
| Does copyright end immediately after the minimum period mandated by the Berne Convention? | No
Works are generally protected for 70 years after the author's death. Works published by the government and recordings, are protected for 50 years. |
CA s.38-44 |
| Has a court or tribunal ever limited the exercise of IP rights under competition law, for example by imposing compulsory licensing or regulating royalties charged by dominant rights holders? | In part
Interpretation would apply competition law to impose restriction on copyright owners.In the recent "PL" decision the court acknowledge balance between cultural rights and the monopoly of sport's broadcasting and allowed the public to use copyrighted material in certain cases. |
|
| Has a court or tribunal ever limited the exercise of IP rights pursuant to a bill of rights or similar human rights instrument, for example by preventing copyright from being used to stifle protected speech? | In part
Lower courts indicate such interpretation. |
|
| Can databases of non-original material be reproduced without infringing a copyright or sui generis database right? | In part
Databases fall in the scope of copyright. But databases are protected only if there is originality in the selection and organization of the data. |
CA s.1, 4 |
| Are rights holders prohibited from excluding user rights under copyright law? | No
In most cases contract prevails over limitation and expiations in national copyright law. |
|
| Is computer software excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter? |
|
Freedoms to access and use
| By Home Users | Is there any general user right that is based on a set of balancing criteria, such as a "fair use" right? | No
|
|
| Is time, space and format shifting allowed (such as ripping music from CD to an MP3 player)? | No
|
CA s.12 | |
| Can consumers reproduce copyright material for their own use in the original format, for example for backup purposes? | In part
Licensed software reproduction is allowed explicitly. Reproduction of software for the purposes of system maintaining, backup or security risk assessment is allowed. |
CA 18, 19, 24 | |
| Can works be communicated to a limited public (for example, family and friends) without infringing copyright? | In part
Licensee is prohibited to communicate the licensed work to public ("private performance" is open to court interpretation). |
||
| For Education | May students copy works for private research or study? | Yes
Subject to fair use criteria: usage purpose, nature of the work, usage scope, affect on the commercial value of the copyrighted work and its potential market. |
CA s. 19 CO s. 1-2 |
| Does any such research and study provision cover distance and online education? | No
|
No (not specifically) CA s. 19 | |
| May translations of works be made for educational purposes? | In part
Only if fair use criteria is satisfied. |
CA s.19 | |
| May educators copy works for use in the classroom? | In part
Pending litigation |
SHOKEN | |
| Online | Are temporary or transient copies, incidental to a lawful use, excepted from copyright? | Yes
|
CA s.26 |
| Does the law exclude or limit the liability of intermediaries such as ISPs for copyright infringements carried out on their network? | Yes
ISPs must expeditiously remove an infringing material from their networks if they become aware that it is likely to be infringing. Courts established the ISP limited liability doctrine and the current act draft adopted it. |
ECP s.9; BOROCHOF ; SUDRI | |
| Is Internet access free of ISP filtering or monitoring for potential copyright-infringements? | In part
Research shows ISPs interfece internet traffic. |
NN | |
| By content creators | Is there any protection for consumers who non-commercially remix or mash up copyright works? | In part
Remixed or mashed up works may be legal if done according to fair use criteria or incidental use. |
CA s.22 |
| May computer software be reproduced or transformed for the purpose of reverse-engineering interoperable software? | Yes
The law protects the right to create a derivative work for the purpose of interoperability. However, reverse engineering specifically is not discussed. |
CA s.24 | |
| Is the incidental inclusion of a work in other material permitted? | In part
Incidental inclusion of copyrighted work maybe allowed in a limited manner. |
CA s.22 | |
| Is there are copyright exception for parody or satire? | Yes
Satire is excluded but not parody. |
GEVA | |
| By the press | Is there a copyright exception for the news of the day? | Yes
The news of the day are not protected; however, the form of expression of news is protected. |
CA s.5(5) |
| May copyright material be reproduced for the purposes of review and criticism? | Yes
|
CA s.19 | |
| May quotations be used for any purpose? | Yes
According to CA expectations. |
CA mark D | |
| By Libraries | May libraries copy works if they cannot reasonably be obtained commercially? | In part
for the purpose of work preserving only. |
CA s.30-31 |
| May librarians copy works for users for the purpose of research or study? | Yes
|
CA s.30 (B) | |
| Are libraries allowed to make preservation or archive copies of materials in their collections? | Yes
It can be done for the purpose of work preserving and replacement of a damaged copy. |
CA s. 30 (A)(1) | |
| Can lending libraries operate without incurring public lending rights fees to copyright owners? |
|
||
| By disabled users | Is it permissible to copy or adapt work for the use of those with disabilities? | In part
According to provisions in "Equal opportunity to disable people" act. |
|
| In public affairs | Are laws excluded from copyright? | Yes
|
CA s.6 |
| Are other governmental works either excluded from copyright, or routinely shared under permissive licences? | Yes
Parliament protocols and courts decisions are excluded from copyright. |
CA s.6 | |
| Are the results of publicly funded research required to be published under an open access licence? | No
|
Freedoms to share and transfer
| Do copyright owners have the right to release their works to the public domain, without any limitation on how those works may be used? | In part
Formaility has to be expressed |
|
| Can public domain works be used without the need for any payment or registration of the use? |
|
|
| Does the law make special provision for the legal use of orphaned works? | Yes
The duration of copyright is limited to 70 year after the creation or first publication of the work. |
CA 40 |
| Is parallel importation of copyright works permitted? | Yes
Court may injunction parallel importation in a case of bad faith. |
ELIYAHU |
| Are there national programmes or policies to promote the use, production or dissemination of openly-licensed material such as free and open source software or open educational resources? | In part
Government provides limited incentives for open source by funding open source software localization projects and adopting open source in governmental offices and institutes. |
|
| Are there national programmes or policies that specify or promote the use of open document formats? | No
|
Administration and enforcement
| What is the maximum penalty for copyright infringement for an individual? | 100,000 NIS (~28,000 USD) | CA s.56 |
| What is the maximum penalty for copyright infringement for a corporation? | 100,000 NIS (~28,000 USD) | CA s.56 |
| Is innocent infringement of IP treated differently by the law? | Yes
|
|
| Is the creation or distribution of devices that can circumvent technological protection measures (TPM) permitted, where such devices can be used for legal purposes? | Yes
|
|
| Is the use of such devices by consumers or intermediaries permitted in the legal exercise of user rights? | Yes
|
|
| Does national copyright or consumer protection law require that the effect of TPMs distributed with copyright works be disclosed to consumers? | No
|
|
| Are there cases in which the availability of injunctive relief for IP infringement is limited by the law on public policy grounds? |
|
|
| Does the law protect a user's Internet access from being suspended for alleged copyright infringement, except after a hearing in court? | No
Several courts already exepted "John Doe" procedure |
|
| Are criminal sanctions limited to cases of large-scale commercial counterfeiting? | Yes
commercial, but not only large scale |
|
| Are damages for copyright infringement limited to the loss sustained, rather than a pre-established or statutory damages award? | Yes
Statutory damages are subject to the damage the plaintiff incurred by the courts estimation (no requirements to prove damage). |
CA s. 56 |
| Is there provision to penalise the wrongful allegation of copyright infringement? | In part
There is no specific regulation which address wrongful allegation of copyright infringement. However, specific clause is suggested at the draft of the E-commerce Act. |
|
| Is there provision to penalise the obstruction of consumers' exercise of user rights? |
|
|
| Does the patent system allow for pre-grant opposition? |
|
Recent or upcoming changes
Summary of position
| Israel's recently-passed Copyright Act is notable as containing one of the few examples outside the United States of a broad general exception for fair use. It also contains a balanced and modern provision for the reproduction of computer software, which includes some innovative exceptions such as reproduction for the purposes of service or maintenance of computer software, and for addressing bugs and security issues. Whilst modern in this respect, the Copyright Act perhaps anachronistically - but more likely quite deliberately - omits to deal with the circumvention of Technological Protection Mechanisms (TPM), thus allowing Israeli consumers to utilise their fair uses rights unfettered by blanket technical limitations. Combined with the fact that mere possession of infringing material without commercial intent is not criminalised, Israel's law demonstrates remarkable balance in the face of significant pressure from content owners for a law slated in their interests. |
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- PDF version
This work is licensed under a Attribution Share Alike Creative Commons license
