Meta sued for allegedly enabling pirated TV on its platforms
Israeli content giants demand damages, claim Facebook turns blind eye to illegal ads.
Several of Israel's largest content companies, led by Yes, HOT, and Keshet, have filed a lawsuit against Meta, alleging that the company enables pirated TV services to advertise on Facebook and Instagram. “Meta is liable for contributory and indirect infringement of the plaintiffs' copyrights due to willful blindness and complete indifference to ongoing infringement on its platforms,” states the lawsuit, which was filed last week in the Tel Aviv District Court.
The plaintiffs, including Zira (an umbrella organization representing copyright holders in Israel), United King Films, Charlton, and the Sports Channelת are demanding that Meta take immediate action to remove the infringing advertisements and prevent similar promotions in the future. They are also seeking information about Meta’s direct and indirect revenues from such ads, and are claiming damages of 2.6 million shekels (approximately $730,000).
At the center of the suit is Meta’s advertising system, which, according to the plaintiffs, enables users to promote posts, including those marketing illegal services, without undergoing even minimal identification. “Meta, in its endless pursuit of ad revenue, knowingly or willfully ignores violations by allowing illegal commercial activity on its platforms,” the complaint states.
The plaintiffs allege that Meta systematically allows users to advertise and sell access to pirated content, including discounted streaming of the plaintiffs' original programming, without the consent of the rights holders, in violation of both its own advertising policies and international intellectual property law.
The lawsuit presents multiple examples of advertisements for devices and services offering pirated content, such as an Android set-top box that, for a one-time fee of 350 shekels, promises lifetime access to content from Yes, HOT, the Sports Channel, Netflix, Disney, and more.
“The sale of pirated IPTV services has become a widespread, organized, and increasingly sophisticated market,” the plaintiffs argue. “Dozens of vendors operate openly across Facebook and Instagram, in serious and ongoing violation of intellectual property laws. Meta not only enables this illegal activity, it profits from it.”
The plaintiffs claim that although such advertisements clearly violate Meta’s terms of use, the company takes no meaningful steps to remove them, unless a complaint is filed. Even then, they argue, enforcement is superficial: once removed, similar infringing ads reappear almost immediately on new pages.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs assert that Meta has the technological capabilities to prevent such ads from being displayed in the first place. “Meta’s refusal to implement an effective monitoring mechanism amounts to willful blindness toward repeated, systematic violations of copyright,” the lawsuit contends. “This is not a matter of technological incapacity, but of unwillingness.”
Meta responded: “We do not comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”
