In view of this identity, the plaintiff's claim was accepted and it was determined that the plaintiff was identified with the character of the "villain" in the book.
- After the identity of the "villain" character for the plaintiff was determined, the injustices to which the plaintiff claimed - defamation and invasion of privacy were examined. These torts were examined with regard to the need to balance between the rights of the plaintiff and the rights of the defendant to seek expression and search for the work.
This examination revealed that the "villain", who is in fact the prosecutor, is portrayed as a criminal heading a criminal organization, as a crook who also deceives his close friends and as a traitor to his country. A description that deserves to be defamed.
This examination also revealed that the defendant was revealing details from the privacy of the plaintiff's life - the gastric bypass surgery he underwent and the diabetes in which he suffered. These details are not merely mentioned casually, but are at the center of the literary plot, as a ridiculous external expression of the plaintiff's body dimensions, and therefore were also found to express an infringement of his privacy.
- The defendant did not raise any defense claim in connection with these torts, did not claim the truth in the publications, did not claim the defense of good faith, and in fact made do with an attempt to refute the claim of identity.
- The plaintiff claimed direct damage caused to him as a result of the publications. These arguments were rejected because no evidence was presented of the loss of a real estate transaction, the damage caused in connection with it, the causal connection between the claim and the publications, and even the possible costs of dealing with the publications.
- The plaintiff claimed, alternatively, for compensation without proof of damage and further claimed that the publications should be counted as many publications, taking into account the number of those exposed to the publications, the number of records distributed by the defendant in connection with the book and the various platforms that the defendant used for the purpose of publication. In practice, it has been found that we are dealing with a single set of publications, since the publication of the book over time, chapter by chapter, does not turn each publication into a separate publication. It was found that the various publications do not change or renew the same publication that portrays the plaintiff as the villain, and in any case the publications were spread over a period of several months and not with large time gaps.
- The plaintiff argued that the defendant should be awarded double compensation, since the publications were made with the intention of harming him. An examination of this claim found that the defendant mentioned the plaintiff's name in the publications he made in connection with the book and even described the villain by means of a picture of an unknown person, whose name is exactly the same as the plaintiff's name - Amit. Taking into account the defendant's full belly on the plaintiff, as he himself noted in the framework of the preliminary claim, in the balance of probabilities, it is more likely that this conduct of the defendant was not accidental. that the defendant also wanted to create an identification between the plaintiff and the character of the "villain" and therefore wanted to harm the plaintiff.
- Taking into account the totality of the circumstances, it was therefore found that the defendant should be obligated to compensate the plaintiff in the sum of ILS 150,000 for defamation and an additional sum of ILS 50,000 for the violation of privacy. It was also found that the defendant should be obligated to repair the book and the manner in which the villain's character is illuminated, so that it will no longer be possible to connect the plaintiff to any character in the book.
- The overriding weight of the principle of search for expression in the legal system in Israel was emphasized above, as was the importance of protecting the right to work. Safeguarding these rights is in the public interest. Allowing the defendant, as a creative artist, to continue and create freely is an expression of the public interest.
The defendant, it seems, abused this public interest. The defendant, it was found, took advantage of his unique skills to settle scores with the plaintiff against the background of a business dispute that arose between them. This is not what the search for the work is intended for, and it is to be hoped that the defendant's skills will be channeled into works that do not harm others.
- Therefore, I accept the claim and order as follows:
- I order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff in the sum of ILS 200,000. This amount will be paid within 30 days, otherwise linkage differentials and interest will be added to it in accordance with the law.
- I oblige the defendant to amend any publication of the book, so that the image of the "villain" (as defined in this judgment) will be corrected as follows: severing the connection to Israel, severing the connection to an academic institution in Bulgaria, severing the connection to businesses in the field of computers, removing any mention of gastric bypass surgery or diabetes related to this character. I further order the defendant to remove any mention of the plaintiff's name from publications related to the book. These repairs will be made within 30 days.
- I order the defendant to bear the plaintiff's attorney's fees in the sum of ILS 50,000.
Granted today, November 13, 2025, in the absence of the parties.