Liability of digital platforms: Israeli law

Service page: Digital commerce and AI lawyer: terms, privacy and direct mailing.

Do you run a forum, an e-commerce site or a social media network? An Israeli user uploaded offensive content and you did not remove it. What is your exposure? The answer depends on one question: did you know, and not act?

What is the legal framework in Israel?

Israel has no dedicated law on platform liability, like the American Section 230, which gives broad protection. Instead, Israeli courts apply general principles: the law of torts, the Prohibition of Defamation Law, 5725-1965, and the Copyright Act, 5768-2007.

The basic rule: a platform that does not know about offensive content is not liable. A platform that knew and did not act may be liable. The key is “knowledge”: that it was given specific notice, or that it “should have known”.

What is a “take-down procedure”, and why is it critical for you?

When someone sends you a notice about offensive content (defamation, copyright infringement, invasion of privacy), this is a critical moment. From the moment of the notice, you knew. What you do from that moment will determine your exposure.

A proper take-down notice should include: specific identification of the offensive content, an explanation of why it is offensive, and the details of the person making the request. Do not act on vague requests, only on documented and detailed ones.

Did you act quickly and reasonably? Your exposure is significantly reduced. Did you ignore it? You risk a lawsuit in which the platform itself, not the user, will bear the damages.

Defamation: when is the platform liable?

The defamation law in Israel applies to a “publisher”, and in certain circumstances this includes a website owner who enabled a publication. As a rule, the more the platform is involved in the content, the greater the risk:

A passive platform (does not edit, does not shape content): low exposure. An active platform (edits, highlights, recommends content): higher exposure, because its involvement may make it a “publisher” under the Law (section 2).

Copyright: what are the platform’s duties?

Under the Copyright Act, a person who authorizes another to do an infringing act also infringes (section 47(a)). “Indirect infringement” is dealing in an infringing copy (selling it, distributing it on a commercial scale and more) when the person knew or should have known that the copy infringes (section 48), and also an act done in the course of business and for profit that makes it easier for the public to access a work made available to it by infringement, when the person knew or should have known this (section 48A). In practice, if you received a notice about content that infringes copyright and did not remove it, you may bear part of the liability.

The solution: a clear DMCA-style policy, even if Israeli law does not require one. Platforms that have a written policy, a reporting mechanism and a removal process are much better protected.

Two procedures in the Copyright Act concern website operators and hosting providers directly. The first: the District Court may order an access provider to restrict access to a website whose main content infringes (section 53A(b)). If the server is located in Israel, or is controlled by a person located in Israel or by a corporation registered there, the hosting provider is joined to the proceeding (section 53A(f)(2)), and the court will, as a rule, order removal of the content from the server instead of restricting access (section 53A(h)). The second: a person who claims that their copyright was infringed online and does not know who the infringer is may ask the District Court to order the respondent, for example the platform operator, to give the court details that will identify the infringer (sections 60B–60C). The details will be passed to the applicant only if they have shown, by prima facie evidence, a real concern of infringement and a reasonable possibility that their claim will be accepted (section 60E(b)).

A community policy: not just public relations, but legal protection

A well-drafted community policy serves two purposes: it sets expectations for users, and also gives you legal protection. If you removed content in line with your own policy, it is hard to sue you over the decision.

The elements that every policy must have: a list of prohibited content, a reporting mechanism, a timetable for handling reports, and an appeal process. Without them, every decision you make will look arbitrary.

Where is legislation heading?

In the European Union, the Digital Services Act (DSA) has applied since 17 February 2024 (Article 93). It imposes on platforms duties of transparency, reporting and handling notices about illegal content. In Israel, bills on preventing offenses committed through publication on the internet (content removal) (הצעות חוק למניעת ביצוע עבירות באמצעות פרסום באינטרנט (הסרת תוכן)) were tabled in the Knesset (Israel’s parliament), but no dedicated law has been enacted. Until one is enacted, the courts continue to develop the case law case by case.

If you run a platform, now is the time to build the right system, before statutory liability is imposed.