Freedom is worse than non-freedom

Background: [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] .

^{Pictured Dmitry Medvedev on June 23, 2011 from the RIA Novosti office uploads a photo to Wikipedia for use in Wikipedia under a free license. By the way, it seems that in this way Medvedev agreed with the CC license agreement and concluded it, and not simple, but copyleft.}

On February 5, 2012, a draft amendment to the civil code was published on the Russian Private Law Portal, in which much was not taken into account.

Stanislav Kozlovsky was informed that “the bill was in the Ministry of Economic Development, where they rewrote the first part. The 4th part, they did not touch at all. ” “Accordingly, they published a version of the Civil Code, where the fourth part is no different from the monstrous April version. Although the fourth part already had instructions from the President, a working group in the Ministry of Communications worked, the Center for Private Law worked, and so on. Now, a terrible scandal has arisen because of this and a fourth part is urgently rewritten before being sent to the Duma. They promised to take into account the amendments of VM-RU and RAEC. ”, He said.
')
It's been 2 months. On April 2, Dmitry Medvedev introduced a bill on amendments to the Civil Code and separate legislative acts to the State Duma.

Well, let's see what was rewritten in the end and what is still taken into account. To do this, compare my favorite suggestions from Wikimedia RU and RAEC with the text of the draft law , published on the website of the State Duma.

The proposal to amend paragraph 2 of Article 1228 and give the opportunity to limit non-property rights - Medvedev did not take into account.

The proposal to amend paragraph 3 of Article 1229 and give the opportunity to manage its share in the exclusive right - Medvedev has not been taken into account.

Humanization proposals for paragraph 6 of the ill-fated article 1233 (the introduction of a sovereign suspicious alternative to public licenses) - Medvedev has not been taken into account. Left a monstrous option.

The proposal to include in Article 2 paragraph 2, of a clear indication of the possibility of concluding contracts through the Internet - Medvedev was not taken into account.

The proposal for paragraph 1 of Article 1246 (on interest rates) - Medvedev is not taken into account.

The proposal on clause 4 of Article 1250 (on liability for violation of the accident) - Medvedev was not taken into account.

The proposal for paragraph 2 of Article 1260 (remove the definition of the site is not in place) - Medvedev did not take into account.

The proposal for clause 1 of Article 1266 (to allow the author to allow changes to his work) - Medvedev did not take into account.

The proposal under paragraph 2 of Article 1269 (cancel the right to withdraw in connection agreements) - Medvedev did not take into account.

The proposal for paragraph 1 of Article 1273 (on e-books) - Medvedev was not taken into account.

The proposal for article 1276 (expansion of the freedom of the panorama) - Medvedev not taken into account.

The proposal for clauses 3, 4 of Article 1286 (on the procedure for the conclusion of contracts) - Medvedev did not take into account.

I did not check a couple of amendments of a clarifying nature.

So ... What is it? Flood and spam identical bills? Maybe they even did not think to start editing? (which is likely) So are they going to take into account the proposals? In the State Duma will correct? For one reading? Because they are already writing that they have so grabbed the deputies in one place, that there will be practically no 2nd and 3rd. Um ... And when this one here bill will be published unchanged as a law and already enters into force, they will also say that it has been lying somewhere all this time, where they did not know about it and we will quickly fix it?

Everything, I will not write anything more, it is better to give again references to the whole prehistory, where everything is said:
[1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10]

Well, the news of RBC and the discussion of the final amendments made to the State Duma:
www.internet-law.ru/forum/index.php?topic=6649
forum.yurclub.ru/index.php?showtopic=285626&st=200
bablaw.livejournal.com/308706.html

PS:
But we still have the freedom of the panorama in the bill, though only for buildings.