State of PalestineCopyright Act, 1911 (Extension to Palestine) Order, 1924, Fair Dealing Exception
In force since .
A snippet reproduction rule binding public and private bodies.
- Instrument type
- an act of a legislature
- Obligation class
- Attribution
What it requires
- You may deal fairly with a work for private study, research, criticism, review or newspaper summary without infringing copyright (Copyright Act 1911, s. 2(1)(i), as extended to Palestine); the exception has no headline-length or short-extract cap and is not limited to the press.
- Do not assume the exception covers a systematic aggregator's reproduction of headlines and snippets: no court ruling has confirmed whether it reaches anything beyond a reporter's own newspaper summary.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.
In the frameworks
- NIST AI RMF
- MAP 4.1Approaches for mapping AI technology and legal risks of its components – including the use of third-party data or software – are in place, followed, and documented, as are risks of infringement of a third party’s intellectual property or other rights.
- NIST AI 600-1
- GAI-RISK-10Intellectual Property
- MIT mitigations Draft
- 3.2Data Governance
- FINOS AIGF
- AIR-PREV-007Legal and Contractual Frameworks for AI Systems
- AIR-DET-013Providing Citations and Source Traceability for AI-Generated Information
Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureYes
Private right of actionYes
Criminal exposure note
Article 3(1) of the Palestine Copyright Ordinance of , which the Ordinance's Article 4 treats as amending and supplementing the Copyright Act, 1911 in Palestine, punishes knowingly making for sale or hire, selling, distributing for trade, exhibiting for trade or importing an infringing copy of a protected work with a fine of up to twenty-five piastres per copy and up to 50 pounds for one transaction, and a repeat offence with the same fine or imprisonment of up to two months. Section 13 of the Copyright Act, 1911 confines that Act's own summary penalties to the United Kingdom.
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
Prosecutions for the offences in Article 3 of the Palestine Copyright Ordinance of 1924 are brought at first instance before the Magistrates' Court (Art. 3(4)); the copyright owner keeps the civil action in damages (Art. 3(6)).
Settledness
- As of
- Open questions
- Does 'newspaper summary' in section 2(1)(i) of the Copyright Act, 1911 reach a systematic aggregator's reproduction of headlines and snippets, as distinct from a reporter's own summary of a news item?
What this law does
The Copyright Act, 1911 (Extension to Palestine) Order, 1924 extended the Imperial Copyright Act, 1911 to Palestine as its law of copyright. The extension order was published at 114 Official Gazette 643. Section 2(1)(i) of the extended Act excepts from infringement any fair dealing with a work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review, or newspaper summary, with no headline-length or short-extract cap and no restriction to the press industry.
Whether this exception, or copyright protection generally, reaches a systematic aggregator's reproduction of headlines and snippets rather than a reporter's own newspaper summary has not been confirmed by a located court ruling. The earliest reported dispute on unauthorised copying of news wire reports, Palestine Telegraphic Agency v. Jaber, pitted the Palestine Telegraphic Agency and the Palestine Bulletin against Jaber, editor of the newspaper Al-Hayat.
The defendant's argument that the Act had never been validly promulgated in Palestine was rejected by the Magistrate's Court and the District Court and was not renewed on the further appeal reported at CA 66/32, Palestine Telegraphic Agency v. Jaber, [1933] 1 PLR 780. The underlying copying question's ultimate disposition is not confirmed in the sources located here.
The United Kingdom itself later repealed the Act's original Sections 1 to 14, including Section 2's infringement and fair-dealing provisions, by the Copyright Act 1956; that domestic UK repeal does not by its own force undo Palestine's earlier reception of the Act's original 1911 text, and no subsequent Jordanian, Egyptian, or Palestinian enactment repealing or replacing the extended Act is confirmed here.
The Act arms a copyright owner with a private civil remedy: an infringement action carries injunction, damages, and account of profits, with a statutory presumption that the plaintiff owns the copyright unless the defendant puts the point in issue.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app reuses other publishers' content.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .