After the Nature and Parks Authority confiscated ornamental fish that were marketed without a license as required, the fish farmers published defamatory publications on the Internet against the farm to which the fish were transferred by the Authority, contending that such farm received the permit to keep the fish due to personal relationships with the Authority, and that this relationship has negative and corrupt characteristics.
The Court rejected the defamation claim due to the defense of truthful publication and the defense of good faith, but ordered the publishers to correct the publication. Defamation is a publication that may damage the honor or good name of another. Israeli law provides defenses, for example when the publication is true and is of a public interest or when the publication was made in good faith. The defense will stand even if the truth of an incidental detail has not been shown, but a publisher may be required to correct incorrect facts, especially in light of the ease under which this may be done with publications on the Internet. Here, the fish farmers indeed published accusations in various media means, but the fish farmers have the defense of good faith, as the publication was made in good faith, mainly concerns the conduct of the Authority and did not target the fish farmer in order to harm it, and the defense of the truth in the publication, as most of the publication was true and relevant to the general public of fish farms. However, the fish farmers were ordered to publish a correction to the incorrect facts in the publications made.