High-profile case9/6/2026

Photographer Demands 100,000 Shekels Over Use of His Works in AI Campaign

Photographer Ben Michael Shir filed a lawsuit against fashion house Comme Il Faut in the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court. He alleges that substantial elements from two of his documentary photographs were used without permission in an advertising campaign created using artificial intelligence.

Key facts

•Plaintiff: Ben Michael Shir
•Defendant: fashion house Comme Il Faut
•Court: Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court
•Demand: 100,000 shekels
•The case number and filing date were not stated
•No court decision has yet been reported

What Happened

Comme Il Faut published the campaign “Don’t Say We Didn’t Know” on its website and social media accounts, presenting the images as having been created using artificial intelligence. Shir alleges that they incorporated figures from two photographs in his documentary series, “Pioneers”—without his knowledge, without payment and without credit.

How the Photographs Were Allegedly Altered

One of the original photographs shows a young man wearing glasses, a kippah and sidelocks, carrying a kid goat on his shoulders against a mountainous background. According to the lawsuit, the campaign placed the same figure amid fire and violence, and replaced the kid goat with a red fuel canister. Another image allegedly used the figure of a red-haired young man wearing a kippah and a checkered flannel shirt.

The Basis for the Claims

Shir argues that the use of substantial parts of the photographs infringed his rights in the works. In addition, in his view, moving the figures from a documentary context into scenes of arson and violence impaired the integrity of the works and violated his moral right. The lawsuit emphasizes that the use of artificial intelligence and the campaign’s social or political message do not in themselves exempt a commercial brand from liability.

What the Photographer Is Asking of the Court

The plaintiff seeks compensation of 100,000 shekels, a permanent injunction prohibiting the use, and removal of the images. He also asks to preserve evidence related to the creation of the campaign: source files, reference materials, instructions for the artificial intelligence tool, metadata, versions, activity logs and correspondence. The source does not state the case number, the filing date, the defendant’s position or any court decision: it concerns only a lawsuit that was filed.

Another Lawsuit Following the Campaign

According to the article, this is the second lawsuit related to the campaign. The Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization, as previously reported, demanded one million shekels because its name appeared on a wall in one of the images, as well as removal of the name or removal of all the publications. The outcome of the proceedings concerning this demand is not stated in the source.

What this means for you

Merely labeling an image as having been created using artificial intelligence does not preclude claims by the creator of source material if the creator believes that substantial parts of their work were reproduced in the result. For photographers and those commissioning AI-generated content, the dispute illustrates the practical importance of the origin of reference materials, obtaining permissions, and retaining campaign creation files and logs. However, the court has not yet ruled, and the plaintiff’s legal position has therefore not yet been upheld.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings