Hosting Center RBC Ukraine vs Infoset.com.ua. Who is adequate? The official response of the host

Regarding the recently published by me here and in my blog at the request of badboom (aka zaebest on searchengines.ru) scandalous history with the hosting center of RBC Ukraine, an official response from HC.UA appeared on searchengines.ru.

Since I do not represent the interests of any of the parties here (not counting the assistance in publishing the materials), I want, for the sake of justice, the official response from the RBC Hosting Center Ukraine to be voiced at Habré.
In addition, the official response to me, as an outsider, seemed no less amusing than the post itself with a complaint ^ _ ^
Sorry, in some moments it is so enchanting that I could not resist and highlighted it in the quote in bold and underlined.

OFFICIALLY:
So that the situation was objectively covered, as far as possible, we will answer a number of questions raised earlier in a post by the author with the nickname zaebest.
')
It all started with the fact that the client’s account was blocked for posting and distributing pornographic materials.

After lengthy explanations by phone (from which it followed that the editors of the portal, visitors, authors, detractors and various other enemies and friends) were guilty of placing, promises that everything would be cleaned, checked, brought in line with the requirements of the public offer and the legislation of Ukraine, we provided access to the new account, set it up and passed information for access to the customer. After some time (about 1 month), we found an increased load created by the new account, checked its cause - a lot of requests to pages with the same materials as previously placed in the old account. For example, a page with the theme “Sex with a horse-2” was often requested. By tags, we found the first horse , and everything else.
Anatomy and physiology in all perspectives and with details. Judging by the nature of the traffic, it merged with the help of conversion, through any TDS.

The author of the post rightly notes that the mass of materials is located on third-party servers (video files, etc.), but on the site itself there were still thumbnails, full-size screenshots of the video, links to the site for replicating information and on internal
and external resources for downloading bulk materials.

The author also notes that we have blocked the domain. And he asserts (repeatedly in telephone conversations) that the domain has nothing to do with the materials distributed, no matter what. But then we ask him to familiarize himself with the answer to this question from Hostmaster: hostmaster.ua/?faqwhois5#lu-1
“Is the registrant of the domain responsible for the information posted on the site in this domain?
Yes, a domain registrant is responsible for using the domain, including for illegal purposes, regardless of who actually uses the domain. ”

Regarding the domain itself - it is provided with a bonus to the hosting package, registered with the registrar nickname handle, since the client did not provide information for registration to himself (we are not aware of the client’s considerations, we can only speculate).

The situation today looks like this - 5 or 6 unknown persons with male voices call to the company (and in Irina’s contacts ...), they are rude, threaten, use obscene expressions, regardless of who answers the calls, are presented by Alexander, Andrey,
Ruslan, “You know who” , “And you guess it,” and so on. Required to transfer the domain to where they specify. Otherwise, the tax, the prosecutor's office, the sanitary epidemiological station, some well-known gangsters and the “director of a motor depot with very poor connections” will deal with this .

Because In the post, the author repeatedly mentions that he was not explained the essence and reasons for the blocking - we will do it again here (believe me, we explained it, no sense whatsoever, a mate in response and a refusal to receive printouts of materials explaining the reasons and screenshots).

Reasons for account suspension are a violation of the terms of the public offer accepted by the client.

hc.ua/order/oferta.jsp

2.3. Rights of the Contractor:
2.3.1. Temporarily (or completely) terminate the provision of the Services to the Subscriber without refund and require written explanations from the Subscriber in the following cases:
- publication and transmission via the Internet of any information that contradicts current Ukrainian or international law. In particular, this applies to pornographic images. Due to the lack of statutory
methods for determining whether a particular image is pornographic, the Contractor reserves the right to such a definition;

According to clause 2.3.1 of the offer, we require the client to provide written explanations regarding the placement of prohibited materials after blocking for the same reason earlier. And now, realizing that the callers and writers are not Baubatrina I.V., we ask you to assure
an explanatory letter from a notary (any notary will gladly agree to fulfill this request) so that we understand that the issue is resolved with an authorized person, the owner of the account.

It should also be noted that the distribution of unlicensed copies of software, video and audio materials, etc., protected by law, is an offense. As well as the use of an unlicensed copy of the DLE engine for organizing the site.

For the future, we ask you not to disturb us in vain when you intend to call with threats, or to re-swear when you refuse to introduce yourself, after a few questions, the operator will reasonably answer you that we do not provide information to unauthorized persons.

Because you have attempted to publicly resolve this issue, outside the context and conditions of the offer, we are forced to give you an answer publicly, revealing information only about the essence of the problem and within the limits of the one you yourself provided here earlier (customer’s full name, for example).

If law enforcement agencies are interested in this incident, we will provide full information when we receive a request drawn up in accordance with the requirements of the law and if there are grounds for transmitting information.

What generally can be said on this issue ... Bias and unreasonable negative.
The only relatively fair statement from zaebest (Irina?) - “Suppose I violated the rules (terms of the contract), why block the domain management then?”. And then again and again fabrications, insults, attacks on people, to which, incidentally, would be worth
listen (for example, on Andreyka, you read his resume - can you do something like that, or even more?).

The result - we expect a written explanation from you, notarized (we must be sure that the letter has been sent to us by the account owner), according to the terms of the offer, as we have repeatedly explained. Letters should be in each case (there are 2). Then we can solve your questions.