No, you haven’t missed the campaign broadcasts. Mercifully those haven’t started yet. This decision relates to
propaganda a Party Political Broadcast from the last election campaign.
Shmuel Rachmani a veteran photo-journalist has sued the Likud – the National Liberal Party for infringing his moral rights by not attributing him as the photographer of a couple of still photos of the double-decker train and the new train lines. The images were shown in campaign broadcasts showing how the Likud (like Mussolini?) had managed to get trains running on time.
After weighing up the fact that the copyright use was not contested, and dismissing as irrelevant the argument that in the heat of the election, corners were cut, but noting that the images were broadcast only briefly, the Tel Aviv District Court eventually ruled 20,000 NIS in statutory damages.
תא (י-ם) 40707-04-13 שמואל רחמני נ’ מפלגת הליכוד-תנועה לאומית ליברלית
Civil Case 40707-04-13, Shmuel Rachmani vs. Likud – Nationalist Liberal Party, Jerusalem District Court Ruling by Rafael Jacobi, 14 December 2014
This is not the first time that copyright issues have come up in party political broadcasts. In the 2009 election, an Israeli photographer sued SHAS, the Sephardi Torah Guardians party for using a copyright photograph.
Chabad successfully obtained an injunction against a parody of their weekly Parsha sheet being used in a Tel Aviv Municipality election.
The problem is not restricted to Israel. Obama was sued for copyright infringement in his election campaign. However, Rumours that Bob the Builder is suing Obama for trademark dilution regarding illicit usage of Bob’s famous catch phrase “Can we fix it? Yes we can”, are apparently unfounded.
Also in 2009, French president Sarkozy’s UMP party (Union pour un Mouvement Populaire) was sued for using Indie group MGMT’s song ‘Kids’ at party rallies without permission.
We realize that copyright infringements are of minor relevance when choosing leaders. Currently the head of one party is a released felon who served time for corruption. We have a would be Prime Minister running at the Head of the Labour party who invoked the right to stay silence to avoid being prosecuted for fictitious non-profit organizations that made contributions to Labour Party’s election campaign and to direct Election of Labour Leader Barak. Their parties see no reason not to allow these to lead their parties. And, Israel Beteinu seems to be have a bunch of members under suspicion of corruption.
In the past I have criticized our Association of Israel Patent Attorneys for their undemocratic election practices. I am wondering if I expect too much of my colleagues? Why should they conform to the best of Western democratic tradition if they are used to Israel style elections, where every reform since the system went wrong in 1977 (by the people erring in their choice of leader), was adopted by incumbents if it was seen likely to further the chances of their preferred candidates. Ironically, and somewhat typically, such changes generally backfired.