The country has a telecommunications authority: the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA). However, it is reported that the decision making process of this entity is not fully independent from the government.

The State of Palestine has not joined any agreement with binding commitments to open transfers of data across borders.

The State of Palestine does not have a comprehensive regime of data protection in place.

According to Art. 31 of Decree No. 10 of 2018 on Cybercrime, a service provider – defined as any person who enables users to communicate by means of information technology or who processes, stores or hosts computer data on behalf of an information service provider or its users – must retain subscriber information for a period of not less than three years.
Under Art. 1 of the Decree, “subscriber information” includes all information held by the service provider relating to service subscribers, such as the type of communications service used, technical requirements, duration of the service, the subscriber’s identity, postal or geographical address or telephone number, payment information available under the service or installation agreement, and any other information concerning the location of the communication equipment based on that agreement.

A basic legal framework on intermediary liability for copyright infringement is absent in Palestine's law and jurisprudence.

A basic legal framework on intermediary liability beyond copyright infringement is absent in Palestine's law and jurisprudence.

According to Art. 2 of the Instructions No. 1 of 2009 on the Registration of the Data of Subscribers to Cellular Telecommunications Services, all licensees providing cellular telecommunications services are required to register a minimum set of subscriber data for mobile services and obtain a copy of the subscriber’s personal identification document. The minimum data to be recorded comprise the subscriber’s full name, national identification card or passport number, place of residence and work, and date and place of birth.

The primary copyright framework applicable in the State of Palestine is the British Copyright Act 1911, which has been in force there since 1924. Pursuant to Art. 2 of the British Copyright Act 1911, copyright is not infringed by fair dealing with a work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review, or the preparation of a newspaper summary.

It is reported that the country's intellectual property framework is outdated and weakly enforced, with particularly limited enforcement of IPR rules in relation to music and audiovisual works.

The State of Palestine has not signed the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.

The State of Palestine has not signed the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Palestine lacks a comprehensive regime for the protection of trade secrets.

There is no obligation for passive infrastructure sharing in the country to deliver telecom services to end-users, and it is not practised in the mobile sector or in the fixed sector, based on commercial agreements.

The government holds shareholdings in certain telecommunications operators. In particular, the State owns 31.7% of Ooredoo Palestine through the Palestine Investment Fund (PIF) and approximately 7% of the Palestine Telecommunications Company (PALTEL), also through the PIF.

According to Art. 8(e)(4) of Instructions No. 1 of 2011 Regarding Protection of Competition in the Telecommunications Sector, the Regulator may require a dominant licensee to implement accounting separation in order to assess potential cross-subsidisation and to help identify other forms of anti-competitive conduct. Art. 8(1) of the Instructions sets out the procedure for determining whether an operator holds a dominant position. It is reported that the government is preparing regulations to operationalise regulatory accounting separation. Furthermore, it is also reported that functional separation is required by law; however, the specific legislative instrument establishing this obligation could not be identified in publicly available sources.