ISOC-IL has filed an amicus curiae brief in proceedings before the Tel Aviv District Court in a case between Zira Ltd. and Google LLC that could set an important precedent for the future of Internet infrastructure in Israel.
ISOC-IL has filed an amicus curiae brief in proceedings before the Tel Aviv District Court in a case between Zira Ltd. and Google LLC that could set an important precedent for the future of Internet infrastructure in Israel. On March 1, 2026, the Court decided to accept ISOC-IL’s brief into the record and to consider it as part of the body of materials before it in the case. In cases of this kind, an amicus brief is not merely procedural; it serves as a public-interest contribution, enabling an expert and independent body to present the broader technological, legal, and civic implications that extend beyond the immediate commercial dispute. ISOC-IL sought to join the case in order to present a full, balanced, and professionally grounded picture of the issues now before the Court.
At the center of the case is an attempt to expand copyright-related blocking orders to public DNS resolvers by interpreting the term “access provider” in section 53a of the 2007 Israeli Copyright Law as applying to public DNS resolvers. As ISOC-IL’s filing makes clear, this proceeding is of exceptional precedential significance, with far-reaching implications for all Internet users in Israel.
ISOC-IL’s position is straightforward: when courts are asked to restrict access to online content, the question is not only what should be blocked, but also at what layer of Internet infrastructure that blocking takes place. Public DNS resolvers are fundamentally different from ISPs and therefore should not be treated as Internet access providers. That distinction matters.
ISOC-IL’s amicus brief lays out the technological background needed to inform the Court’s reasoning in this case and in future cases: how the DNS works, why public DNS resolvers are a legitimate and valuable layer of Internet infrastructure, and why DNS resolvers are fundamentally different from ISPs. The brief also presents the findings and recommendations of Internet institutions and the broader technical community, including ISOC, the IETF, and ICANN, and highlights the consistent warning that DNS-level blocking can create overblocking, undermine trust in Internet infrastructure, harm cyber resilience, and fragment the Internet’s global domain name system while offering only limited effectiveness.
The brief further argues that courts should exercise judicial restraint and avoid broad interpretations of the scope of blocking orders under Israeli law. It also clarifies the meaning of “access provider” in the broader context of Israeli law and refers to relevant developments in other jurisdictions, including the EU Digital Services Act, while highlighting the proportionality risks inherent in open-ended or indefinite blocking orders against global Internet services.
The brief’s broader message is that public DNS services are not a “mechanism for taking down copyright-infringing websites,” and should not be portrayed as “a tool for circumventing copyright law”, but rather as a legitimate infrastructure that plays a critical role in supporting the privacy, cybersecurity, and resilience of the global Internet. Forcing them into the role of content-blocking intermediaries would do more than expand liability; it would fundamentally alter the role of a core layer of Internet infrastructure.
In a case with consequences well beyond the parties at hand, ISOC-IL has stepped in to help ensure that the Court has the full public-interest and technical context before setting legal precedent.
Read the full amicus brief in Hebrew:
ISOC-IL Amicus Brief to the Tel Aviv District Court
For the machine-translated English version of the brief:
ISOC -IL Amicus Brief to the Tel Aviv District Court (machine-translated English)