In the District Court of Tel Aviv – Yafo C.C. 32162-06-17 Mitug Ma’archot Mevuzarot Ltd. v. Automated Bank Services Ltd. et al. March 7, 2023
Before the Honorable Judge Tamar Avrahami
The Plaintiff: Mitug Ma’archot Mevuzarot Ltd. By Mr. Moshe Shitrit
Versus
The Defendants: 1. Automated Bank Services Ltd. By their counsel, Adv. Dr. Yoav Ostreicher and Adv. Neta Arbel [Meitar | Law Offices]
2. Smart Advanced ATM Services, Keren HaTamar Ltd. By their counsel, Adv. Nir Kehat [Tadmor Levy & Co., Law Offices]
Partial Judgment
1. Before me is a claim by a software development company against a client engaged in operating ATM (Automatic Teller Machine) devices, and against a company to which the client sold this activity. It is alleged that the Defendants have made and are making infringing uses of software developed by the Plaintiff, in violation of agreements, copyright laws, and additional laws.
ATM devices are known in our region as "Kaspomat" machines. Hereinafter, mixed use will be made of these terms.
The Parties and the Essence of the Dispute
2. The Plaintiff, Mitug Distributed Systems Ltd. (hereinafter also: "Mitug"), is a software development company specializing in tailoring software solutions to client needs. There is no dispute that the Plaintiff is a "one-man show"; the living figure in Mitug, its manager and controlling shareholder, is Mr. Moshe Shitrit ("Shitrit"). Shitrit represented Mitug in the proceeding himself.
3. Defendant No. 1, Automated Bank Services Ltd. ("Shva"), was founded in 1979 as a joint services company of the five major banks at the time. Shva operated a network of ATM devices not attached to bank branches, an activity managed for many years as a monopoly.
4. On September 20, 2012, Shva was granted a conditional exemption from the approval of a restrictive arrangement, which stipulated, among other things, that it must sell the ATM network it owned within a set time and subject to the approval of the Commissioner. In 2013, Margalin Holdings Ltd. ("Margalin") won the tender for the sale of the ATM activity, and it assigned the win to Smart Advanced Kaspomat Services, Keren HaTamar Ltd., which is Defendant No. 2 ("Keren HaTamar" or "The Fund"), established for this purpose.
5. Between Shitrit—directly or via the Plaintiff—and Shva, there were commercial relations in the context of software developments and related services for quite a few years.
6. According to the Plaintiff, at a certain stage, it developed, in coordination with Shva, and sold to it usage licenses for software known as MultiXFS ("The Software"), usage licenses which were non-transferable. The Plaintiff continues and claims that in 2013, when Shva sold the ATMs to Keren HaTamar, it transferred the copies of the Software installed in the machines and the licenses to the Fund without permission, and even after being warned not to do so.