0+ / 18+ to bet or not?
Today, you can often see 18+, 16+, 12+ and even 0+ icons on Internet sites ...
This is caused by the sensational Law No. 436- “On the protection of children from information harmful to their health and development” (hereinafter - the Law). Most site administrators put badges "for peace of mind" in order not to anger Roskomnadzor. Whether it’s a writer who described the battle without “the triumph of good over evil,” or the administrator creating a platform for comments that could be “foul language”, or even a realtor or an e-wallet creator who fears that the law sets restrictions on information able to induce the child unknowingly harm the family budget.
Badges these order tired. We decided to look into it, did the legislator really obligate everybody to put badges or is it just a mass senseless reinsurance?
')
According to paragraph 1 of Art. 14 of the Law, administrative and organizational measures, hardware and software and hardware to protect children from inappropriate information, which must be used by the owners of all other information products, should be carried out only by persons “arranging access to the Internet” in places accessible to children, with the exception of providers . Simply put, we are talking about the owners of Internet cafes, Wi-Fi networks, etc. We cross our fingers that the vague wording does not apply to parents who connect the Internet at home.
Clause 2 of the same article indicates that a site on the Internet information and telecommunications network, not registered as a mass medium, may contain a mark of information products (including in machine-readable form) and (or) a text warning about limiting its distribution to children, corresponding to one of the categories of information products, established by part 3 of article 6 of the Law.
This means that informational signs are not required on a non-media site, and it’s not necessary to indicate at the slightest hint of violence 18+, nor is it necessary to indicate 0+ if such violence is not intended.
The law prescribes that the mark must be placed in the published programs of television and radio programs, lists and catalogs of information products, as well as in such information products placed in information and telecommunication networks - but not on the very page of the site (paragraph 4 of Article 12 of the Law ). It is curious that about the signs on audiovisual works (on which information is indicated in the rental certificate, but not on the screen), the records of events (it is assumed that the sign was on a ticket or billboard) the law says nothing.
Often, administrators set their own age limit policy. So, for Google account holders (which allows access to services such as Google+, Gmail, YouTube), Facebook has a minimum age of 13, Google Wallet users (18+), to access some YouTube videos - 18. However, these restrictions have nothing to do with legal requirements.
Not all administrators are so conscious. Products that can “harm the health and development of children” are no less distributed, or even more than those on television, radio broadcasting, etc., without any signs. And possible explanations for such non-interference of the state in the Internet environment (a large array of sites involving the difficulty of detecting violators; the fact that sites are searched for by the user purposefully (as, incidentally, audio and video media) does not look convincing.
Article 5 of the Law gives a closed list of “non-child” information (subject to additional restrictions for children up to 6, 12 and 16 years old in Article 7-10). Restrictions are subject to information that can harm their education and development (containing foul language, can cause children to desire to use drugs and other intoxicating substances, tobacco, alcohol, or play games of chance, induce prostitution, vagrancy or begging, etc.)
We will not stop at thinking about what information “encourages to vagrancy” (and whether “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer” can be attributed here, as accredited experts of www.zakon436.ru/books.php considered ), “denial of family values” ( “Carlson, who lives on the roof”, see ibid.) And the absence of expression of compassion for the victim of violence (the scene of the “perfidious killing of the wizard by the Cat” in the fairy tale “Puss in Boots”) - we are forced to leave these questions to the law enforcer.
Consider the specific elements of the site.
According to the Recommendations on the application of the Federal Law-436, “comments and / or messages are not marked, posted at the discretion of the readers of a network publication on the website of such a publication” - administrators who organize comment platforms can breathe a sigh of relief.
Also, the news feed is not marked with information products. However, for the remaining elements of news sites (analytical articles, galleries, which are present on almost all such sites), the affixing of signs is mandatory. There is a contradiction: it is recommended to put an age restriction sign on the main page of the site in the upper right corner, and not on the page where there is “inappropriate” information that is not included in the news feed. It turns out that if the analyst describes in the article a forceful suppression of the rally or expresses an attitude towards a ban on propaganda of sexual minorities, then the whole site is already subject to labeling. It remains to hope that the law enforcement officer will remember that the Recommendations are not binding.
Separately, you need to make a reservation about the icons on the promotional products. An information sign should be placed only on advertising information products (events, films, books, etc.) but not other goods and services (Letter of the FAS Russia dated December 14, 2012 No. C ​​/ 42338/12 “On placement of information products in advertising” ). A number of entrepreneurs are confused by article 6 of the Law “On Advertising”, which prescribes which advertising is unacceptable “in order to protect minors from abuse of their trust and lack of experience”. Putting informational signs on such an advertisement would be a mistake, because, firstly, it is not provided for by the law “On Advertising”, and secondly, it does not exempt the entrepreneur from liability, because prohibited by the article advertising in any case is unacceptable.
This is caused by the sensational Law No. 436- “On the protection of children from information harmful to their health and development” (hereinafter - the Law). Most site administrators put badges "for peace of mind" in order not to anger Roskomnadzor. Whether it’s a writer who described the battle without “the triumph of good over evil,” or the administrator creating a platform for comments that could be “foul language”, or even a realtor or an e-wallet creator who fears that the law sets restrictions on information able to induce the child unknowingly harm the family budget.
Badges these order tired. We decided to look into it, did the legislator really obligate everybody to put badges or is it just a mass senseless reinsurance?
')
Should site administrators specify age limits?
According to paragraph 1 of Art. 14 of the Law, administrative and organizational measures, hardware and software and hardware to protect children from inappropriate information, which must be used by the owners of all other information products, should be carried out only by persons “arranging access to the Internet” in places accessible to children, with the exception of providers . Simply put, we are talking about the owners of Internet cafes, Wi-Fi networks, etc. We cross our fingers that the vague wording does not apply to parents who connect the Internet at home.
Clause 2 of the same article indicates that a site on the Internet information and telecommunications network, not registered as a mass medium, may contain a mark of information products (including in machine-readable form) and (or) a text warning about limiting its distribution to children, corresponding to one of the categories of information products, established by part 3 of article 6 of the Law.
This means that informational signs are not required on a non-media site, and it’s not necessary to indicate at the slightest hint of violence 18+, nor is it necessary to indicate 0+ if such violence is not intended.
The law prescribes that the mark must be placed in the published programs of television and radio programs, lists and catalogs of information products, as well as in such information products placed in information and telecommunication networks - but not on the very page of the site (paragraph 4 of Article 12 of the Law ). It is curious that about the signs on audiovisual works (on which information is indicated in the rental certificate, but not on the screen), the records of events (it is assumed that the sign was on a ticket or billboard) the law says nothing.
Often, administrators set their own age limit policy. So, for Google account holders (which allows access to services such as Google+, Gmail, YouTube), Facebook has a minimum age of 13, Google Wallet users (18+), to access some YouTube videos - 18. However, these restrictions have nothing to do with legal requirements.
Not all administrators are so conscious. Products that can “harm the health and development of children” are no less distributed, or even more than those on television, radio broadcasting, etc., without any signs. And possible explanations for such non-interference of the state in the Internet environment (a large array of sites involving the difficulty of detecting violators; the fact that sites are searched for by the user purposefully (as, incidentally, audio and video media) does not look convincing.
If signs should be placed, on which products and where exactly?
Article 5 of the Law gives a closed list of “non-child” information (subject to additional restrictions for children up to 6, 12 and 16 years old in Article 7-10). Restrictions are subject to information that can harm their education and development (containing foul language, can cause children to desire to use drugs and other intoxicating substances, tobacco, alcohol, or play games of chance, induce prostitution, vagrancy or begging, etc.)
We will not stop at thinking about what information “encourages to vagrancy” (and whether “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer” can be attributed here, as accredited experts of www.zakon436.ru/books.php considered ), “denial of family values” ( “Carlson, who lives on the roof”, see ibid.) And the absence of expression of compassion for the victim of violence (the scene of the “perfidious killing of the wizard by the Cat” in the fairy tale “Puss in Boots”) - we are forced to leave these questions to the law enforcer.
Consider the specific elements of the site.
According to the Recommendations on the application of the Federal Law-436, “comments and / or messages are not marked, posted at the discretion of the readers of a network publication on the website of such a publication” - administrators who organize comment platforms can breathe a sigh of relief.
Also, the news feed is not marked with information products. However, for the remaining elements of news sites (analytical articles, galleries, which are present on almost all such sites), the affixing of signs is mandatory. There is a contradiction: it is recommended to put an age restriction sign on the main page of the site in the upper right corner, and not on the page where there is “inappropriate” information that is not included in the news feed. It turns out that if the analyst describes in the article a forceful suppression of the rally or expresses an attitude towards a ban on propaganda of sexual minorities, then the whole site is already subject to labeling. It remains to hope that the law enforcement officer will remember that the Recommendations are not binding.
Separately, you need to make a reservation about the icons on the promotional products. An information sign should be placed only on advertising information products (events, films, books, etc.) but not other goods and services (Letter of the FAS Russia dated December 14, 2012 No. C ​​/ 42338/12 “On placement of information products in advertising” ). A number of entrepreneurs are confused by article 6 of the Law “On Advertising”, which prescribes which advertising is unacceptable “in order to protect minors from abuse of their trust and lack of experience”. Putting informational signs on such an advertisement would be a mistake, because, firstly, it is not provided for by the law “On Advertising”, and secondly, it does not exempt the entrepreneur from liability, because prohibited by the article advertising in any case is unacceptable.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/185580/
All Articles