Roskomnadzor filed a lawsuit to block Telegram
“Based on Art. 15.4 of the Federal Law "On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection" Roskomnadzor on Friday, April 6, filed a lawsuit to the Tagansky District Court of Moscow with a request to restrict access to information resources to the information dissemination organizer on the Internet Telegram Messenger in Russia Limited Liability Partnership ”, such a message appeared on the Roskomnadzor website on the morning of April 6, 2018.
“The statement of claim was filed in connection with the detection by the FSB of Russia of the failure of Telegram Messenger Limited Liability Partnership to fulfill the obligations of the organizer of the dissemination of information established by clause 4.1 of art. 10.1, ”explains the regulator.
At 11:21, lawyers of Telegram published such a comment : “There is no suit against Roskomnadzor. There is no such case on the website of the Tagansky Court. There will be a lawsuit, it will be clear in what order the trial will proceed, what grounds and so on. Telegram will prepare objections to the claim, all documents, as always, will be published . ”
"Telegram's position remains the same - the requirements of the FSB to provide access to private correspondence of users are unconstitutional, not based on law, technically and legally impracticable, therefore, the blocking requirement is also unreasonable," the official said.
')
On March 20, 2018, Roskomnadzor notified Telegram of the need to provide the FSB with keys to decrypt user messages within 15 days.
A few days before the deadline for the ultimatum expired on March 30, 2018, Telegram's lawyers notified Roskomnadzor that it was technically impossible to provide the FSB with keys for decrypting user correspondence. The published response notes that Telegram has two types of messaging: cloud chat and secret chat. “Messages transmitted via“ secret chats ”are never stored on Telegram servers. The correspondence of users of “cloud chat” is stored in encrypted form, distributed between different subsystems and is never stored in one place, ”the letter says.
On April 6, Roskomnadzor, instead of initiating the blocking procedure, files a new lawsuit.
A small explanation from Telegram lawyers, why Roskomnadzor again went to court:
In a sense, the second suit of Roskomnadzor can be regarded as another attempt to delay the time. Even if the Tagansky court approves the demand of Roskomnadzor and decides to block the services of the company, Telegram lawyers can challenge the court’s decision. Thus, there are several more steps to go before the actual blocking. When lawyers dispute the decision in all instances and lose, and Telegram again refuses to hand over the keys to the FSB within 15 days, only then Roskomnadzor can proceed to block the messenger.
As the history of Zello shows , blocking at the state level can reduce the popularity of the messenger in Russia by about 50%, but by no means 100%.
Separate officials also understand the impossibility of de facto blocking the messenger: “It’s ridiculous to consider blocking from a technology point of view, and this can create considerable inconvenience for ordinary users, ” said Internet ombudsman Dmitry Marinichev in a comment to Interfax. - The unavailability, for example, of receiving applications from an electronic store, inconvenience in passing messages in the service may cause some rejection from users ... A group of service apologists will in any case remain and use it, as new mechanisms will appear, applications proposed by developers that will solve problems ... It will be a war of shields and swords to some extent senseless and illogical. "
Some experts believe that Roskomnadzor is afraid of making a decision on blocking Telegram itself. This is how the situation last week was characterized by Pavel Chikov, a Russian public figure, the head of the Agora International Human Rights Group, a member of the Presidential Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation:
“The statement of claim was filed in connection with the detection by the FSB of Russia of the failure of Telegram Messenger Limited Liability Partnership to fulfill the obligations of the organizer of the dissemination of information established by clause 4.1 of art. 10.1, ”explains the regulator.
At 11:21, lawyers of Telegram published such a comment : “There is no suit against Roskomnadzor. There is no such case on the website of the Tagansky Court. There will be a lawsuit, it will be clear in what order the trial will proceed, what grounds and so on. Telegram will prepare objections to the claim, all documents, as always, will be published . ”
"Telegram's position remains the same - the requirements of the FSB to provide access to private correspondence of users are unconstitutional, not based on law, technically and legally impracticable, therefore, the blocking requirement is also unreasonable," the official said.
')
On March 20, 2018, Roskomnadzor notified Telegram of the need to provide the FSB with keys to decrypt user messages within 15 days.
A few days before the deadline for the ultimatum expired on March 30, 2018, Telegram's lawyers notified Roskomnadzor that it was technically impossible to provide the FSB with keys for decrypting user correspondence. The published response notes that Telegram has two types of messaging: cloud chat and secret chat. “Messages transmitted via“ secret chats ”are never stored on Telegram servers. The correspondence of users of “cloud chat” is stored in encrypted form, distributed between different subsystems and is never stored in one place, ”the letter says.
On April 6, Roskomnadzor, instead of initiating the blocking procedure, files a new lawsuit.
A small explanation from Telegram lawyers, why Roskomnadzor again went to court:
“Until January 1, 2018, the dissemination organizer’s information could be blocked by a decision of Roskomnadzor or by a court decision that came into force. It was precisely by the decision of the RKN that the Zello online radio and the Blackberry Messenger, for example, were blocked. They did not enter the registry.
Telegram did not enter registries either, Roskomnadzor entered it independently. Since January 1, 2018, the Federal Law on Information has been amended, in particular, in Article 15.4:
- in part 2, the words “or decisions of an authorized federal executive body” shall be deleted.
Roskomnadzor interprets these changes as a duty to file a lawsuit on blocking. Since this is the first such precedent, it is still unclear even in the framework of the CAS or the GIC, or in general, this will happen. It is not even known whether the court is going to involve Telegram in the case. ”
In a sense, the second suit of Roskomnadzor can be regarded as another attempt to delay the time. Even if the Tagansky court approves the demand of Roskomnadzor and decides to block the services of the company, Telegram lawyers can challenge the court’s decision. Thus, there are several more steps to go before the actual blocking. When lawyers dispute the decision in all instances and lose, and Telegram again refuses to hand over the keys to the FSB within 15 days, only then Roskomnadzor can proceed to block the messenger.
As the history of Zello shows , blocking at the state level can reduce the popularity of the messenger in Russia by about 50%, but by no means 100%.
Separate officials also understand the impossibility of de facto blocking the messenger: “It’s ridiculous to consider blocking from a technology point of view, and this can create considerable inconvenience for ordinary users, ” said Internet ombudsman Dmitry Marinichev in a comment to Interfax. - The unavailability, for example, of receiving applications from an electronic store, inconvenience in passing messages in the service may cause some rejection from users ... A group of service apologists will in any case remain and use it, as new mechanisms will appear, applications proposed by developers that will solve problems ... It will be a war of shields and swords to some extent senseless and illogical. "
Some experts believe that Roskomnadzor is afraid of making a decision on blocking Telegram itself. This is how the situation last week was characterized by Pavel Chikov, a Russian public figure, the head of the Agora International Human Rights Group, a member of the Presidential Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation:
Roskomnadzor
Roskomnadzor's ultimatum expired yesterday. Telegram's answers to his address 97-fz_in@rkn.gov.ru do not reach, they don’t reach the main box, probably by mail, too. And the guys consider reading published in the media below their dignity. No replicas and answers, as early as steps, Roskomnadzor has not yet voiced.
At the same time, Roskomnadzor does not plan to start blocking Telegram only on the basis of a court decision on an administrative offense of October 2017, Alexander Zharov, head of Roskomnadzor , explained to Kommersant .
Please note that the legislation is ambiguous - the existence of a court decision in an administrative case can be interpreted as sufficient to start a blockage. We would like - so decided. However, the ILO is not taking such a step, therefore, it delays, hangs and shifts the solution to the other shoulders. Each time, it emphasizes that they are only technical performers. Performers whose will in this case? Of course, the FSB.FSB
It is clear that these guys are the main block lobbyists. It makes no sense to delve into the expediency, benefit and rationality of this path. The office over the past couple of years has captured more and more influence in the country, undermining the authority of competitors (TFR) and eliminating smaller players (FSKN).
However, if their influence was enough to make a decision on blocking Telegram, it would have been accepted long ago. Why all this clumsy line with mix messaging with terrorism, which was launched in June last year and lasts until yesterday. Personally, the director of the FSB forms a public (or personal) opinion on the terrorist activities of Telegram, using the logic of the kindergarten level. Pay attention, no matter how much Bortnikov wanted to mention Telegram specifically, he does not do this. There would be iron evidence - he would bring them.
By the way, Viber and WhatsApp have many more users in Russia. At the same time, they are not even listed in the register of organizers of information (Telegram was included in it in June 2017 by Roskomnadzor itself).
Obviously, the FSB is working to shape the opinions of a particular person, playing with paranoid motives and unsubstantiated obscure language that are usual for the special services.Ministry of Communications
Nikiforov, no doubt, supports Telegram and, in general, against all this holy war, security forces against the Internet. After all, he is the Minister of Communications of the Medvedev Conscription. However, he cannot step beyond the line of competence of the FSB, which is constantly being discussed .
“I very much hope that this will be considered at the site of this or that court, because a judicial decision will confirm or refute certain norms that exist in legal acts today.”
It is clear that Nikiforov appeals in reality not to the court (the court does not decide anything, remember, if not yet), but to some other person. Tom, which stands above it and above the FSB.mass media
All the media, with the rare exception of frankly marginal loyalists (we will not enumerate them, a lot of honor), are widely and actively supporting the Telegram side. Far from only conditionally liberal / oppositional. For example, Komsomolskaya Pravda is surprisingly realistically sensible, describes in detail the entire history of Telegram and teaches how to bypass a future block .Court
Once again, the court in Russia does not decide anything. A reference to the court is a signal that the issue should be resolved compromise and not stand on one side or the other. But to decide, of course, behind the scenes. Well, let's hang the question for some time and wait what the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation will decide. Not in the sense that it decides, but in giving more time. The lawyers of Telegram filed a petition to send a request to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the Meshchansky court on the administration. This possibility remains if desired.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/358030/
All Articles