What will block your site? Roskomnadzor and resource bank in a nutshell
Immediately about the end: in PS you can find a brief content and see if it is worth reading all this meaningfully. I will say right away - it's worth it, because everything is not as simple as we would like.
At once I will say that there are articles on Habré about the checks of Roskomnadzor, they are interesting, but they tell a little about something else (for example, this one , this one or another one ).
There are legends about Roskomnadzor (RCM): some of them are myths, some are stories about the black, black room, but some of them are true. The material below is about how and when your site may suffer from RCM and why.
')
For a start, a mini FAQ.
1. Who and what is blocked?
Much has been written about this and you can read it, including the link on the offsite http://eais.rkn.gov.ru/ , you can also look at https://reestr.rublacklist.net/ .
2. Are locks effective?
Yes and no. Let me clarify: some say that, for example, “RuTracker’s audience fell a year after blocking, but" the number of downloaded torrents did not change, while others clarify: "... blocking Rutracker.org reduced its advertising revenues and audience (and yet admit that ... users did not download less pirated content). ". VPN, TOR, etc. create room for thought, and the popularity of, say, LocalBitcoins has only increased thanks to the information in the online media about the site's bath.
3. Legal basis:
The general order of blocking can be read in the Wiki, but I am more interested in risks . Not only legal, but also economic, organizational ...
So, first of all, this is “carpet blocking”: for sure everyone remembers Absurdopedia and its ban by IP, when in fact all sites on the Wikia engine were blocked. Similarly, the Lurkomore site suffered from IP blocking. At the same time, not everyone can afford dedicated hosting, and a dedicated IP service is inexpensive, but does not solve the “one IP - several sites” problem. The problem of domains and subdomains is not solved either: even for large players. Let's say https://market.yandex.ru/ and https://money.yandex.ru/ - this is not (at all) Yandex. The first one was singled out because of the Federal Law "On Commodity Aggregators" , which is still under consideration. The second is because of the notorious Federal Law No. 161 “On the National Payment System” (historically, the allocation was “before”, but in fact it was the law and the subsequent sale of part of the savings bank that determined the fate of Ya. Money).
Secondly, in order not to think that there are any obstacles to blocking - a few examples of the brightest of them : because of various errors, for example, the Good Corporation itself was blocked by Google (domain gstatic.com). Wikipedia, Vkontakte, Reddit, Pikabu also got into objectionable ... Moreover, Roskomnadzor itself threatened with blockages of it-giants (by the way, I recommend carefully reading the comments, at least with the first of them). And, of course, everyone remembers LinkedIn's “triumphant” closure. At the same time, the rationale for closing LK was more than doubtful in my opinion. But this is a separate conversation.
One of the biggest problems of such blockages is that they often occur after a long time after the adoption (in absentia, as a rule) of a court decision.
Here, for example, the Absentee decision of 03/27/14 of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Penza: “the plaintiff Elistratov D.G. He appealed to the court with the aforementioned lawsuit, stating that the websites of the information and telecommunications network “Internet” www.sportswiki.ru and www.expewrt.sportswiki.ru , the hosting provider of which is the defendant Ltd. MakHost, openly advocated the use of ... unlimited circle persons, indicated the place of purchase ... and provides links to websites on the Internet, where you can order by e-mail and then receive ... (The court then concludes that you need) to oblige the defendant “MakHost LLC” to limit access to Internet sites indefinitely: www. sportswiki.ru and www.expewrt.sportswiki. ru by blocking the DNS names of these sites on the DNS servers of the hosting provider. ” A part of the ban on illicit drugs was made not by me - but directly by the court, for it is so supposed: no wonder D. Assange called them one of the three horsemen of the Apocalypse (more precisely, in the book “Shifropanki”, D. Applebaum speaks about this in an interview with Julian, but the last all this supports and develops).
By the way, according to statistics, most often they are the cause of the blocking.
But what is more interesting is the name of the claimant: Elistratov D.G. And here we come close to one of the important problems - unfair competition . In particular, it is “any actions of economic entities (groups of individuals) that are aimed at obtaining benefits in doing business, contradict the laws of the Russian Federation, business practices, requirements of integrity, rationality and fairness and caused or may cause damage to other economic entities - competitors either inflicted or could harm their business reputation. ” Previously, there was another, more accurate in this case, wording: “the dissemination of false, inaccurate or distorted information that could cause damage to another business entity or damage its business reputation.”
So, on the website parapharm-russia. ru (I do not want active links for such resources) we see that this is exactly the case - Elistratov DG - they are calling the General Director . Again, based on the description on the site, we get: “Parapharm manufacturing enterprise” was established in Penza, and has been operating successfully since 1995. Our profile is a high-tech production of therapeutic and prophylactic drugs . ” Moreover, Elistratov DG He is also a director and another very speaking company name, secret-dolgolet. ru. According to Vicky-sport workers: “you can see the first precedent, as the producers of dietary supplements or another large company can easily block any objectionable site ”.
The following was also very clearly noted: “in this case, the lawsuit of Elistratov did not indicate specific sections of the encyclopedia dedicated to drugs, but the address of the portal’s main page - Sportswiki.ru and the website Expewrt.sportswiki.ru, forwarding to this homepage. The second address, apparently, is a typo and should look like Expert.sportswiki.ru, without an extra letter “w” in the first part of the URL. ”
Thus, neither procedural (see above), nor factual errors are a barrier to blocking: rather, on the contrary, the backward nature of the development of district (and peace) courts is the key to the success of most of the cases analyzed. But all this is a separate topic, as the industry is being reformed today.
In the meantime, I’ll dwell on another important thesis: “the resource is in the list http://eais.rkn.gov.ru/ . At the same time, the first notifications were received 3 months after the court decision was made , thus, it can no longer be appealed (the appeal period is 3 months). ”
The decision was canceled only on February 26, 2015 by the Presidium of the Penza Regional Court.
And here, to help it-businessmen would like to insert their 2 pennies, which are not just rescued.
The fact is that Russian Post, in spite of the flights , the development of the e-commerce segment and other innovations, still does not want to perform its main duties properly. For example, bring judicial notices to the legal address.
Meanwhile, in the Order of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Russian Post" dated August 31, 05 No. 343, it is noted that "... after the delivery of the primary notices ... the secondary notifications are delivered and handed over upon receipt ".
In addition, in the Procedure for receiving and delivering internal registered mail items, which was approved by the Order of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Russian Post” dated 17.052 No. 114-p, states: “20.2. RPO are delivered to the addresses indicated on them (except for defective mail and RPO with an inventory of attachments) or are issued at postal sites. Delivery to the address indicated on the postal item is subject to : postal item and notification of receipt of the category " Custom " ... ".
Moreover, the obligation of the postman according to the Procedure for receiving and delivering internal registered mail items includes the following obligation: “upon returning from the delivery, the postman submits: invoices of the nominal form 16 (with receipts from recipients), notices of f.22 to the RPO, forms E 1 -in "Confirmation of receipt" ... ".
Then - you can look at the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 12 of February 17, 2011 (as amended on July 11, 2014 ) “On some issues of the application of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation ...”, which states that “... judicial notice is sent to three appropriate addresses, and the legal entity ... is considered properly notified if the judicial notice is delivered at least to one of these addresses. ”
The same position is also emphasized by the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 221 of April 15, 2005 “On Approval of the Rules for Providing Postal Services”, on the basis of which all the orders of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Mail of the Russian Federation” were issued: “postal mail (mail order) with acknowledgment of delivery ” ... - a postal item (postal order), upon which the sender instructs the postal service operator to inform him or the person specified by him, when and to whom the postal item was delivered ... ”.
I will say even more that, according to the explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, the word “to hand” means “... to give into the hands, to give directly, personally to someone”.
Why all these legal delights?
To the fact that art. 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation stipulates the following: “the defendant has the right to file an application with the court in absentia decision to cancel this court decision within seven days from the date of delivery of a copy of this decision to him”. And this is one of the main distinguishing features of the absentee solution.
Unfortunately, not all my colleagues (it-lawyers) understand and share this position, but, believe me, it becomes a lifeline when the careless work of the Russian Post, the excessive zeal of Roskomndazor and the prosecutor’s office are combined with consumer terrorism , if not . About this - a little more below.
Recall the blocking of btc sites: of the latter - exmo.com and localbitcoins.com , and earlier - bitcoin.org, indacoin.com, coinspot.ru, hasbitcoin.ru, bitcoinconf.ru, bitcoin.it, btcsec.com (hereinafter - Sites about Bitcoin).
So, regarding Exmo: “the lawsuit was filed by the Prosecutor of the Primorsky District against Roskomnadzor with the requirement to restrict the site to Russian users because of the information contained therein that is prohibited in Russia ” And this is despite the fact that the site has a very specific owner who does not have Russia has no (in the legal field) relationship:
It is consumer terrorism, not otherwise?
Until I found the full text of the decision (I will be grateful for the help) - a hypothesis from a colleague: "... the lawsuit was filed by the Prosecutor of the Primorsky District against Roskomnadzor demanding that the site be restricted to Russian users because of the information it contains that is banned in Russia. There is The prosecutor filed a lawsuit on an application to the Prosecutor’s Office of a natural or legal person on this site. Why Primorsky District Court? Because the lawsuits about the termination of the search engine’s issuance of links that allow access to and formation in the information and telecommunication network "Internet" may be brought to the court at the place of residence of the plaintiff, that is, finding the Prosecutor that the Prosecutor was one of the residents of our Primorsky district, or LE! ". Maybe. I will say more - there are already similar examples.
And here is a link to outright arbitrariness: according to the decision on the SOB sites: "... cryptocurrencies ... are monetary substitutes" (Decision dated October 05, 2014 of Nevyansk City Court of the Sverdlovsk Region). I note that in the city of Nevyansk there are 23,545 people, whereas, according to Pr-Cy, bitcoin.org alone has an attendance of 230,509 people per month . In a word, it is the same as demolishing a house on 16 floors and on 5 entrances in order to protect the rights of the residents of the “opposite house”, which is an old shack of 30 square meters. meters, koi share 3 people with a very stained reputation (in Irkutsk, such cases have been encountered, but with a negative outcome for the owners of the “hovels”).
But in the meantime, cryptocurrencies are not monetary substitutes . Moreover, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, which according to the Federal Law "On the Central Bank" one can decide that there is a money substitute (unless otherwise fixed at the FL level), through the deputy chairman - O. Skorobogatov clearly expressed in 2016 that the crypto market will be settled in the next 2-3 years, but for now - no need to touch it. But the prosecutor's office and others like it did not stop.
To make it clearer: the Central Bank has an information letter (about the same as about “digital money”) dedicated to bonuses: “issuing non-credit organizations cards, including gift, accumulative, discount , "Bonus", for the purpose of their use by individuals for settlements with suppliers of services (goods, works) other than card issuers ... is a violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation . " An interesting presentation of the material - Informational letter of 02/28/13 . Thus, if the state. the authorities will “disperse”, under such a formulation can get: any services, with bonus programs (cinemas, hosting, online shopping ....); services like WebMoney; all sorts of “miles” from airlines, etc.
Therefore, you should not deceive yourself if you think that it blocks only “absolutely dangerous, and those who are connected with the crypt”.
If it is interesting - the next time we continue on the bonuses. For now - everything. Questions will be a great addition!
PS For those who read only the beginning and the end - abstract of the article:
At once I will say that there are articles on Habré about the checks of Roskomnadzor, they are interesting, but they tell a little about something else (for example, this one , this one or another one ).
There are legends about Roskomnadzor (RCM): some of them are myths, some are stories about the black, black room, but some of them are true. The material below is about how and when your site may suffer from RCM and why.
')
For a start, a mini FAQ.
1. Who and what is blocked?
Much has been written about this and you can read it, including the link on the offsite http://eais.rkn.gov.ru/ , you can also look at https://reestr.rublacklist.net/ .
2. Are locks effective?
Yes and no. Let me clarify: some say that, for example, “RuTracker’s audience fell a year after blocking, but" the number of downloaded torrents did not change, while others clarify: "... blocking Rutracker.org reduced its advertising revenues and audience (and yet admit that ... users did not download less pirated content). ". VPN, TOR, etc. create room for thought, and the popularity of, say, LocalBitcoins has only increased thanks to the information in the online media about the site's bath.
3. Legal basis:
- The Federal Law "On Information ..." - I recommend to anyone who is tied to IT;
- Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 26, 2012 No. 1101 “On the Unified Automated Information System ...”;
- Order of Roskomnadzor dated September 11, 2013 No. 1022/368/666 “On approval of the evaluation criteria for materials and (or) information ...”;
- Order of 21.02.13, “On the approval of the order of interaction ...” (even on the state website http://eais.rkn.gov.ru/docs/170.pdf )
- Moreover, there are also “Recommendations on restricting access to information disseminated through the information and telecommunication network“ Internet ”...”, in which one can get acquainted with an almost complete blocking cycle.
- And yes, in detail about the grounds - at the office .
The general order of blocking can be read in the Wiki, but I am more interested in risks . Not only legal, but also economic, organizational ...
So, first of all, this is “carpet blocking”: for sure everyone remembers Absurdopedia and its ban by IP, when in fact all sites on the Wikia engine were blocked. Similarly, the Lurkomore site suffered from IP blocking. At the same time, not everyone can afford dedicated hosting, and a dedicated IP service is inexpensive, but does not solve the “one IP - several sites” problem. The problem of domains and subdomains is not solved either: even for large players. Let's say https://market.yandex.ru/ and https://money.yandex.ru/ - this is not (at all) Yandex. The first one was singled out because of the Federal Law "On Commodity Aggregators" , which is still under consideration. The second is because of the notorious Federal Law No. 161 “On the National Payment System” (historically, the allocation was “before”, but in fact it was the law and the subsequent sale of part of the savings bank that determined the fate of Ya. Money).
Secondly, in order not to think that there are any obstacles to blocking - a few examples of the brightest of them : because of various errors, for example, the Good Corporation itself was blocked by Google (domain gstatic.com). Wikipedia, Vkontakte, Reddit, Pikabu also got into objectionable ... Moreover, Roskomnadzor itself threatened with blockages of it-giants (by the way, I recommend carefully reading the comments, at least with the first of them). And, of course, everyone remembers LinkedIn's “triumphant” closure. At the same time, the rationale for closing LK was more than doubtful in my opinion. But this is a separate conversation.
One of the biggest problems of such blockages is that they often occur after a long time after the adoption (in absentia, as a rule) of a court decision.
Here, for example, the Absentee decision of 03/27/14 of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Penza: “the plaintiff Elistratov D.G. He appealed to the court with the aforementioned lawsuit, stating that the websites of the information and telecommunications network “Internet” www.sportswiki.ru and www.expewrt.sportswiki.ru , the hosting provider of which is the defendant Ltd. MakHost, openly advocated the use of ... unlimited circle persons, indicated the place of purchase ... and provides links to websites on the Internet, where you can order by e-mail and then receive ... (The court then concludes that you need) to oblige the defendant “MakHost LLC” to limit access to Internet sites indefinitely: www. sportswiki.ru and www.expewrt.sportswiki. ru by blocking the DNS names of these sites on the DNS servers of the hosting provider. ” A part of the ban on illicit drugs was made not by me - but directly by the court, for it is so supposed: no wonder D. Assange called them one of the three horsemen of the Apocalypse (more precisely, in the book “Shifropanki”, D. Applebaum speaks about this in an interview with Julian, but the last all this supports and develops).
By the way, according to statistics, most often they are the cause of the blocking.
But what is more interesting is the name of the claimant: Elistratov D.G. And here we come close to one of the important problems - unfair competition . In particular, it is “any actions of economic entities (groups of individuals) that are aimed at obtaining benefits in doing business, contradict the laws of the Russian Federation, business practices, requirements of integrity, rationality and fairness and caused or may cause damage to other economic entities - competitors either inflicted or could harm their business reputation. ” Previously, there was another, more accurate in this case, wording: “the dissemination of false, inaccurate or distorted information that could cause damage to another business entity or damage its business reputation.”
So, on the website parapharm-russia. ru (I do not want active links for such resources) we see that this is exactly the case - Elistratov DG - they are calling the General Director . Again, based on the description on the site, we get: “Parapharm manufacturing enterprise” was established in Penza, and has been operating successfully since 1995. Our profile is a high-tech production of therapeutic and prophylactic drugs . ” Moreover, Elistratov DG He is also a director and another very speaking company name, secret-dolgolet. ru. According to Vicky-sport workers: “you can see the first precedent, as the producers of dietary supplements or another large company can easily block any objectionable site ”.
The following was also very clearly noted: “in this case, the lawsuit of Elistratov did not indicate specific sections of the encyclopedia dedicated to drugs, but the address of the portal’s main page - Sportswiki.ru and the website Expewrt.sportswiki.ru, forwarding to this homepage. The second address, apparently, is a typo and should look like Expert.sportswiki.ru, without an extra letter “w” in the first part of the URL. ”
Thus, neither procedural (see above), nor factual errors are a barrier to blocking: rather, on the contrary, the backward nature of the development of district (and peace) courts is the key to the success of most of the cases analyzed. But all this is a separate topic, as the industry is being reformed today.
In the meantime, I’ll dwell on another important thesis: “the resource is in the list http://eais.rkn.gov.ru/ . At the same time, the first notifications were received 3 months after the court decision was made , thus, it can no longer be appealed (the appeal period is 3 months). ”
The decision was canceled only on February 26, 2015 by the Presidium of the Penza Regional Court.
And here, to help it-businessmen would like to insert their 2 pennies, which are not just rescued.
The fact is that Russian Post, in spite of the flights , the development of the e-commerce segment and other innovations, still does not want to perform its main duties properly. For example, bring judicial notices to the legal address.
Meanwhile, in the Order of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Russian Post" dated August 31, 05 No. 343, it is noted that "... after the delivery of the primary notices ... the secondary notifications are delivered and handed over upon receipt ".
In addition, in the Procedure for receiving and delivering internal registered mail items, which was approved by the Order of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Russian Post” dated 17.052 No. 114-p, states: “20.2. RPO are delivered to the addresses indicated on them (except for defective mail and RPO with an inventory of attachments) or are issued at postal sites. Delivery to the address indicated on the postal item is subject to : postal item and notification of receipt of the category " Custom " ... ".
Moreover, the obligation of the postman according to the Procedure for receiving and delivering internal registered mail items includes the following obligation: “upon returning from the delivery, the postman submits: invoices of the nominal form 16 (with receipts from recipients), notices of f.22 to the RPO, forms E 1 -in "Confirmation of receipt" ... ".
Then - you can look at the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 12 of February 17, 2011 (as amended on July 11, 2014 ) “On some issues of the application of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation ...”, which states that “... judicial notice is sent to three appropriate addresses, and the legal entity ... is considered properly notified if the judicial notice is delivered at least to one of these addresses. ”
The same position is also emphasized by the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 221 of April 15, 2005 “On Approval of the Rules for Providing Postal Services”, on the basis of which all the orders of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Mail of the Russian Federation” were issued: “postal mail (mail order) with acknowledgment of delivery ” ... - a postal item (postal order), upon which the sender instructs the postal service operator to inform him or the person specified by him, when and to whom the postal item was delivered ... ”.
I will say even more that, according to the explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, the word “to hand” means “... to give into the hands, to give directly, personally to someone”.
Why all these legal delights?
To the fact that art. 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation stipulates the following: “the defendant has the right to file an application with the court in absentia decision to cancel this court decision within seven days from the date of delivery of a copy of this decision to him”. And this is one of the main distinguishing features of the absentee solution.
Unfortunately, not all my colleagues (it-lawyers) understand and share this position, but, believe me, it becomes a lifeline when the careless work of the Russian Post, the excessive zeal of Roskomndazor and the prosecutor’s office are combined with consumer terrorism , if not . About this - a little more below.
Recall the blocking of btc sites: of the latter - exmo.com and localbitcoins.com , and earlier - bitcoin.org, indacoin.com, coinspot.ru, hasbitcoin.ru, bitcoinconf.ru, bitcoin.it, btcsec.com (hereinafter - Sites about Bitcoin).
So, regarding Exmo: “the lawsuit was filed by the Prosecutor of the Primorsky District against Roskomnadzor with the requirement to restrict the site to Russian users because of the information contained therein that is prohibited in Russia ” And this is despite the fact that the site has a very specific owner who does not have Russia has no (in the legal field) relationship:
It is consumer terrorism, not otherwise?
Until I found the full text of the decision (I will be grateful for the help) - a hypothesis from a colleague: "... the lawsuit was filed by the Prosecutor of the Primorsky District against Roskomnadzor demanding that the site be restricted to Russian users because of the information it contains that is banned in Russia. There is The prosecutor filed a lawsuit on an application to the Prosecutor’s Office of a natural or legal person on this site. Why Primorsky District Court? Because the lawsuits about the termination of the search engine’s issuance of links that allow access to and formation in the information and telecommunication network "Internet" may be brought to the court at the place of residence of the plaintiff, that is, finding the Prosecutor that the Prosecutor was one of the residents of our Primorsky district, or LE! ". Maybe. I will say more - there are already similar examples.
And here is a link to outright arbitrariness: according to the decision on the SOB sites: "... cryptocurrencies ... are monetary substitutes" (Decision dated October 05, 2014 of Nevyansk City Court of the Sverdlovsk Region). I note that in the city of Nevyansk there are 23,545 people, whereas, according to Pr-Cy, bitcoin.org alone has an attendance of 230,509 people per month . In a word, it is the same as demolishing a house on 16 floors and on 5 entrances in order to protect the rights of the residents of the “opposite house”, which is an old shack of 30 square meters. meters, koi share 3 people with a very stained reputation (in Irkutsk, such cases have been encountered, but with a negative outcome for the owners of the “hovels”).
But in the meantime, cryptocurrencies are not monetary substitutes . Moreover, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, which according to the Federal Law "On the Central Bank" one can decide that there is a money substitute (unless otherwise fixed at the FL level), through the deputy chairman - O. Skorobogatov clearly expressed in 2016 that the crypto market will be settled in the next 2-3 years, but for now - no need to touch it. But the prosecutor's office and others like it did not stop.
To make it clearer: the Central Bank has an information letter (about the same as about “digital money”) dedicated to bonuses: “issuing non-credit organizations cards, including gift, accumulative, discount , "Bonus", for the purpose of their use by individuals for settlements with suppliers of services (goods, works) other than card issuers ... is a violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation . " An interesting presentation of the material - Informational letter of 02/28/13 . Thus, if the state. the authorities will “disperse”, under such a formulation can get: any services, with bonus programs (cinemas, hosting, online shopping ....); services like WebMoney; all sorts of “miles” from airlines, etc.
Therefore, you should not deceive yourself if you think that it blocks only “absolutely dangerous, and those who are connected with the crypt”.
If it is interesting - the next time we continue on the bonuses. For now - everything. Questions will be a great addition!
PS For those who read only the beginning and the end - abstract of the article:
- There are at least three ways to abuse the right to block:
- consumer terrorism (a separate article is assumed);
- arbitrariness of state bodies;
- unfair competition.
- The article has an elegant way to protect against absentee court decisions made several months before the actual blocking of the site.
- There are a lot of organizational problems with locks (I will also try to describe separately with due interest to the topic):
- subdomain blocking;
- IP block;
- Actually, bypassing locks.
- Among other things, the article provides interesting links and useful examples.
- Finally, it asked several important, for every it-businessman, questions about the possible consequences.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/325554/
All Articles