On 1 July Vladimir Putin signed amendments to the federal law ‘On information’ which provides for blocking access to copies of pirate websites, so called mirror sites, that provides copies of sites that have been blocked on the basis of the decision of the Moscow City Court.  Novaya Advokatskaya Gazeta published an article on the topic titled ‘Mirrors to be beaten without trials’ which collected expert opinions about the amendments.

Senior Associate at Maxima Legal, Maxim Ali, who specialises in IP/IT matters, commented that in the final draft of the law, which was signed by the President, the procedure for blocking mirror sites was radically changed.  “Previously the discussion was about whether the reason for blocking a site should be a court order, issued on the basis of a decision by the Ministry of Communications that a site is ‘confusingly similar’ to a site that has already been blocked by the Moscow City Court.  The new procedure for blocking such a site does not provide for any kind of court decision.  As such to restrict access to a copy of a blocked site it will be sufficient for a decision of the Ministry of Communications, which will be sent to Roskomnadzor and then to internet providers”, explains Maxim.

At the same time, according to Maxim the procedure established by the new law does not provide the owners of websites with an opportunity to challenge any blocking: “The law does not provide a remedy for a violation or an effective route to appeal a decision of Ministry of Communications or the conduct of Roskomnadzor.  The only route left for the owners of sites which may have been classed as mirror sites in error is to apply to court.  In this regard a very important role will be played by criteria of the Russian government, which will determine whether a site is classed by the Ministry of Communications as ‘confusingly similar’ with a pirate site and should be blocked”.

For a full version of the article, please see the following link.

Novaya Advokatskaya Gazeta has published an article titled ‘Social networks under surveillance’, which discusses a number of proposed amendments to legislation which will introduce obligations on the operators of social networks to restrict, delete and store information which is displayed on their networks; a failure to comply with these obligations can result in liability.

Senior Associate at Maxima Legal, Maxim Ali is certain that, although the proposed fines should encourage social networks to comply with legislation on data protection, such strict regulation may be disastrous for the industry.

Maxim drew attention to the fact that the fines for internet businesses have ceased to follow any principle of proportionality. “If previously fines set out in the Code for Administrative Breaches were imposed for specific breaches, now social networks can be punished for violating any norms that regulate their activities.  The result of which is that even an insignificant breach for the new rules creates a risk that a network may incur liability”, explained Maxim.  Reasons for fining a network could be, for example, a feedback page being inaccessible for more than an hour, not deleting content within a specified timeframe or a violation of the regulatory requirements for what should be sent to Roskomnadzor.

Furthermore, the proposed amendments includes periods for the storing and deleting of information at the request for users that are half those provided for in the Yarovaya Law (a controversial law regulating communications and information in Russia) for similar situations.  The result of which is legislation might become contradictory.

There is a feeling that the state is prepared to put social networks in a position whereby it will be easier for content to be silently removed, rather than to understand the worries of users, concluded Maxim Ali.

For the full version of the article, please click here.

Delovoy Peterburg, a business newspaper in St Peterburg, has published an article titled ‘Lawyers for MRCK Severo-Zapada have thought up a way to speed up the recovery of debts from distributors’ which includes comments from Senior Associate at Maxima Legal and Head of the Dispute Resolution Practice, Sergey Bakeshin.

In the article, Sergey comments that the instances of speeding up the collection of debts from distributors is reasonably rare and ‘the commercial courts only in exceptional circumstances will require the immediate performance of a decision on the recovery of damages.  A counter provision alone is not enough, it is necessary to prove to the court that the special nature of the situation requires immediate performance of the decision.  This is extremely difficult to do, accordingly claimants often use other tools such as enforcement as a solution.’

For the full version of the article (in Russian) click here.