I. Summary

In a decision of the Israeli Supreme Court dated January 16, 2006, in the matter of CA 8117/03 Eitan Inbar v. Asaf Jacob (not yet published), it was held, inter alia, that a textbook published by a student constitutes an infringement of the lecturer's copyright in his university lectures.

II. The Factual Background

Dr. Jacob lectured Tort Law in the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya. Inbar, a former student of his, published a legal textbook on tort law shortly after his graduation from law school.

Dr. Jacob filed a claim against Inbar for copyright infringement (CC 2477/02), claiming that substantial portions of Inbar's textbook were copied from his lectures. According to Dr. Jacob, the copying was reflected, inter alia, in the structure of the textbook, the manner in which various ideas were expressed and analyzed, and the use of specific examples given by Dr. Jacob in his lectures. Inbar denied the allegations and argued, inter alia, that the textbook was based on general ideas in tort law which were in the public domain, and that he only used the general knowledge acquired by him during his law studies.

The Tel-Aviv District Court accepted Dr. Jacob’s claim and found copyright infringement. Accordingly, the District Court ordered Inbar to refrain from distributing the text book, to recall all the books that are in the possession of distributors, to deliver a list of the purchasers of the book, and to deliver a report on his profits from selling the book. In addition, Dr. Jacob’s attorney was appointed as receiver on the books.

Subsequently, Inbar filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.

III. The Supreme Court's Decision

The Supreme Court gave a detailed and reasoned judgment, dismissing Inbar's appeal and validating the District Court's decision. In a nutshell, the Judgment determined, inter alia, as follows:

  • university lectures are subject to copyright protection even though they are not explicitly listed in the definition of "literary work" in the Israeli Copyright Law
  • the question whether lectures, orally delivered, are protected even if they are not fixed (i.e., documented) was left open, since in the specific case it was determined that the lectures were indeed fixed, both by the lecturer and by his students in their classes;
  • there was a 'distinguishable similarity' between the lectures and the textbook (including in the structure of the two works, the literal expression of ideas and the examples used);
  • substantial parts of the lectures had been copied into the textbook

The Supreme Court, however, emphasized that a student is entitled to use ideas included in the lectures as well as the methodologies and the analysis skills which he acquires; he is not, however, entitled to use the specific manner of expression used by the lecturer.

Dr. Jacob was represented in the above case by the undersigned.

Contributor:
Avi Ordo, Adv.
S. Horowitz & Co.
Tel-Aviv, Israel

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.