The “IMDbPro Israel” case concerns individual entries in the industry service in which Israeli film distributors apparently are no longer assigned to the distribution territory of Israel. Instead, designations such as “Palestinian Territories” or “Occupied Palestinian Territories” appear. Particularly contentious: The affected Israeli companies state that their contracts explicitly name Israel.
The case was made public by Haaretz. According to the information currently available, the entire IMDb film database is not affected, but rather the professional industry service IMDbPro, and particularly information about which companies hold distribution rights for specific territories.
Passende X-Beiträge
Aus dem SCHLAGSEITE X-ArchivIsraeli distributors dispute the entries
According to the reports available, the differing territorial designations appear, among other places, for films distributed by Israeli companies such as Red Cape, Lev Cinema, New Cinemas or United King. The productions “Runner” and “Backrooms” are cited as examples.
Red Cape told Haaretz that it had been unaware of the way it was displayed and intended to ask IMDb to correct it. According to the company, its contracts were unambiguous and described the acquired distribution territory in a single word: Israel.
Lev Cinema also stated that it did not enter the information at IMDbPro itself. According to the company, the information is submitted by the producers or the international distribution companies or sales agents of a film. According to the concluded contracts, the rights acquired by Lev Cinema covered distribution in Israel.
IMDbPro Israel: the same company, two different territories
Particularly notable is that the change apparently does not even appear consistently within the same distribution company. According to Haaretz’s investigation, Red Cape is listed for “Backrooms” with the distribution territory “Palestinian Territories.” For the film “Monitor,” which was also distributed by Red Cape, Israel continues to appear.
This inconsistency is precisely what makes the IMDbPro Israel case interesting. It argues against the claim that Israel has generally and comprehensively been replaced by another territorial designation at IMDbPro. At the same time, it makes it more difficult to explain the matter as merely a uniform technical change to the database. Why comparable distribution rights held by the same company are designated differently remains unclear.
A Cannes film is also affected
Another example is provided by the Spanish-French film “La bola negra” by Javier Calvo and Javier Ambrossi. The film competed at the 2026 Cannes Film Festival. According to reports about the IMDbPro entries, the Israeli distributor New Cinemas is listed there as the distribution company for the “Occupied Palestinian Territories.”
The issue is therefore not limited to individual productions by Red Cape. Comparable designations appear for several Israeli distributors and various international productions. Freely accessible reproductions of the Haaretz investigation name Lev Cinema and United King alongside Red Cape and New Cinemas.
Who changed the information?
This is precisely where the unresolved issue lies. The official IMDb guidelines for distribution entries call for information on region, year or period, and distribution medium. Previous and current distributors in different media and territories can be recorded. According to IMDb’s definition, a distributor includes a company that has acquired the legal distribution rights to a title.
The structure therefore generally fits Lev Cinema’s explanation that such information is not necessarily entered by the Israeli distributor itself. Producers, rights holders, sales agents or other industry participants may be involved in maintaining the data.
Accordingly, several explanations remain possible based on the information currently available: IMDb may have changed its internal territorial designations or assignments; producers or international distribution partners may have entered the relevant data; or several factors may have come into play. It has not been established which of these possibilities applies.
IMDb has not yet issued a statement. According to the Haaretz investigation and its international reproductions, the company did not respond to the inquiry about the conspicuous territorial information.
ℹ️ Important context
Israel has not generally been removed from IMDb. The publicly accessible IMDb database continues to list Israel as a separate country of production. The issue currently documented concerns individual entries for distribution territories within IMDbPro.
“Occupied Palestinian Territories” is not a synonym for Israel
This is not merely an inconsequential variation of the same geographical designation in linguistic terms, either. In the terminology used by UN bodies such as OCHA , “Occupied Palestinian Territory” refers to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. The State of Israel does not fall under this designation.
For the area that OCHA calls the “West Bank,” the designation Judea and Samaria is used in Israeli as well as biblical-historical usage. Regardless of this differing terminology, the decisive point remains the same: Israel and the area designated by OCHA as the “Occupied Palestinian Territory” are not interchangeable geographical references.
If an Israeli cinema distributor contractually acquires rights for the Israeli market and that contract is assigned in IMDbPro to an area designated as the “Occupied Palestinian Territories,” this changes the geographical statement conveyed by the record.
More than an inconsequential metadata issue
Territorial designation is no decorative footnote, particularly when it comes to distribution rights. It describes the market for which a company acquired rights. The fact that different territorial designations appear within the same database, and sometimes even for the same Israeli distributor, makes the matter in need of explanation.
In the IMDbPro Israel case, based on the current state of the facts, it would be wrong to speak of a systematic deletion of Israel from the entire platform. It would be equally premature to dismiss the documented discrepancies as a meaningless database error. Several Israeli distributors say their contracts name Israel, while IMDbPro shows other territories for individual films. Until IMDb explains how these entries came about, this contradiction remains.
ℹ️ Factual basis and primary sources for the article 📑
▶️ Haaretz:
IMDb replaces the name Israel with the Occupied Palestinian Territories
Original investigation into the differing distribution information at IMDbPro, the films affected and the reactions of Israeli film distributors.
▶️ IMDb:
IMDb country search: Israel
Demonstrates that Israel continues to be listed as a separate country of production in the publicly accessible IMDb database.
▶️ IMDb Help:
IMDb guidelines on distributors and distribution territories
Official description of distribution data, including information on territory, period, medium and legal distribution rights.
▶️ Festival de Cannes:
La bola negra
Official Cannes page for the film by Javier Calvo and Javier Ambrossi, which was shown in the festival’s competition in 2026.
▶️ LiFO:
IMDb replaced the name Israel with the term “Occupied Palestinian Territories”
Freely accessible secondary reproduction of the Haaretz investigation, with information on the films affected and statements by Israeli distributors.
▶️ UN OCHA:
The West Bank including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip
OCHA uses “Occupied Palestinian Territory” for the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. The State of Israel is not designated by this term.
🔎 Found an error, criticism or addition?
SCHLAGSEITE.eu stands for careful research and transparent corrections. Have you discovered a factual error, unclear wording or a broken link? Then send me your note. If possible, please provide a verifiable source.
