Кто владеет информацией,
|27 feb 2017|
Keyboard Was Equaled to a Bayonet...
Baranov Anatoly 13.02.2008
Despite of rather negative responses in society, there is a document ready in Council of Federation which will demand from the owners of sites obligatory registration of a resource as mass-media, if its audience exceeds 1 thousand people.
The senator from Chuvashia Vladimir Slutsker considered that to solve a problem of publication of "wimping out" and slander in the Internet, it is necessary to distribute force of law «About Mass-Media» on Internet - editions. As he said, «the key amendment to the law should become an item about obligatory registration of Internet - sites with audience not less than 1 thousand visitings a day. It corresponds to the article 12 of the law «About Mass-Media» where printed mass-media with circulation over 1 thousand copies and more are subjected to obligatory registration».
«Article 57 (the law «About Mass-Media») relieves today from responsibility mass-media for publication of slanderous and doubtful data if these data are literal reproduction of messages and materials distributed by other mass media. This item provides an opening in the legislation to unfair journalists and editions which can reprint any disinformation from the Internet and not bear any responsibility for it», - Slutsker gave reason for his offer in conversation with correspondent of "Interfax".
It is necessary to recollect at once that it was Slutsker who initiated bringing of criminal case on journalist Oleg Lurje who ostensibly extorted from him and his wife, general director of a network of training halls World Class Club Olga Slutsker, large sums for a block for publication of compromising materials. Now Lurje, being placed under the guard, is charged in extortion and swindle (item 163 and 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). No matter how one treats Lurje, position of the senator in a question of mutual relations between "the best people" with a caste of "Grub-street journalists and ink-slingers" cannot be considered completely impartial. Quite explainable desire "to put up against the wall" can be looked through. As there are still in the Internet very rigid materials <http://scandaly.ru/news/news4053.html> about the past of the businessman - senator.
Commission on information policy of the upper chamber of parliament continues to work over the law "About Internet", it's headed by senator from Tuva Lyudmila Narusova, who in easy state of mind in November, 2007 by the order of the CEC FORUM.msk switched off from Internet - authorities didn't need laws and lawful procedures by the time.
This one thing - direct interest of initiators of the bill should, on idea, serve to refusal in registration of the document. Laws in Russia are prepared and "pushed forward", so it turns out, directly personally interested people.
Well, in general, who are "senators" now? There was time, they were chosen, then governors were started to be appointed on a post of senators and chapters of legislative assemblies. And now on representation of Administration of the President being a senator "is stamped" by the obedient majority of "Edinaya Russia". That is legislative function in Russia belongs to people who are not chosen, to promoted workers. There is no point to pretending otherwise, having seen, how many people from the list "Forbs" are among senators, it becomes clear how these people become "nobles".
Deeper problems, than simply personal interest of the "nobles" not only in personal immunity which they get together with being a senator, but also inviolability of their reputations which, as well as incomes, demand too frequently careful "skimming" are incorporated also in the given legislative initiative.
Let's say, present law about mass-media determines precisely what and how it regulates and what couldn't get under action of the law by definition.
Articke 2. Mass media. Basic Concepts
Mass media is understood as periodic printed edition, radio-, TV-, videoprogram, film-chronicle program, other form of periodic distribution of the mass information;
Products of mass media is understood as circulation or a part of circulation of separate edition of periodic printed edition, separate program on radio, TV-, film-chronicle program, circulation or a part of circulation of audio or videorecording of the program;
Distribution of the products of mass media is understood as sale (subscription, delivery, distribution) of periodic printed editions, audio or videorecordings of programs, translation of radio, teleprograms (announcement), demonstration of film-chronicle programs;
As we see, the law about mass-media in today's edition determines mass media very precisely - mass-media is an enterprise which not only makes information, but also distributes it, i.e. makes certain goods, in this case information one. Body of rules which is also called as the law about mass-media is registered for them, for the participants of rather specific information market. The law, by and large, doesn't concern those who make information on not market basis, who do not consider production of information as business and information itself as the goods.
For example, Article 12 "Release from Registration" directly says: "Registration is not required: if mass media is established by the bodies of the government and institutions of local government exclusively for publication of their communiques and materials, normative and other acts". That is publication of laws is not considered as trading operation as laws even in the bourgeois state are distributed free-of-charge.
Certainly, present so-called "legislators" can cut and alter legislative field of the country as they want but a change of definition of the concept of mass-media in the law will lead to necessity to rewrite the law completely as practically all articles of the law this or other way base on basic definitions formulated in this very law. There is no saying about other laws basing on the given act. Even in our rather specific legal field frankly wild plants will be all the same subjected to weeding. There is a definition of mass-media as specific producer of specific goods - information and there is no way out.
Otherwise it will be necessary to recognize, for example, inscriptions on fences near the stations as mass media as these inscriptions are seen by thousand people in the trains passing them every day. Tribunes and megaphones on meetings where the number of participants exceeds the figure of 1000 people specified by Slutsker can also be treated as mass media. Let alone posters and banners in city streets as well as graffito placed in the centers of cities. The poster placed on the automobile which goes along the streets of the big city could appear a mean of mass media and so on.
If you need so analogies - Internet-media today are hi-tech analogue of sanctity which even in Maoist China, in the heat of a cultural revolution didn't dare to forbid. Internet-media are some kind of antipode to mass-media and not their part. Mass-media are an information business, while Internet-media are reaction of a civil society to the information environment. Slutsker finds analogue there where there is an opposition - yes, antagonists frequently are similar as orthodox Jews are frequently similar to orthodox anti-Semites as late Natan Eidelman wrote to Victor Astafjev in his correspondence. But to say that conformists - Jews and anti-Semites - fanatics are the same, likely, will be "a little bit too much".
This purely Russian legal problem has also certain global aspect.
Who defines the number of entries on this or that site, i.e. analogue of "circulation"? All existing counters are established by the owners of sites voluntary - or not established. For example, there are no counters on Dmitry Medvedev's personal site. Whether senator Slutsker will consider that Mr. Medvedev maliciously evades from registration by way of non-establishment of the counter? Will he send him to a fish bowl as Lurje?
Well, to make installation of the counter obligatory is necessary to create official state counter - because none of the existing accounting machines is quite correct and guarantees statistics from falsification. Besides, how it is possible legislatively to oblige someone to use services of a private shop? Antimonopoly committee will howl here!
Besides, how it is possible to force to use the state Russian statistics sites which are outside of the borders and jurisdiction of the Russian Federation? I do not speak that all potentially "problem" sites there and then will move on foreign hosting but even if "compulsory registrars" at definition of "citizenship" of a site begin to be guided by a domain name in zone RU, here they will come across burdensome letdown: the site can have numerous "mirrors" in foreign zones or in zones "without citizenship". But zone RU is not a state property of the state Russia but only national zone allocated by ICANN and IANA - international noncommercial organizations created in autumn, 1998 at participation of the government of the USA for regulation of questions connected with domain names, IP-addresses and other aspects of functioning of the Internet. Russia has no sovereignty in the Internet, there is no at all such concept there as the state sovereignty.
It is possible, certainly, to start to press on a person who has registered the domain on his name, but it will remind campaign on return of capitals home, only not capitals but sites. But the law is not necessary for this purpose, soldering iron, a baseball bat and press-hangout will be enough.In Russia nobody is insured that it will take place as there are among legislators suitable people. They will consider situation with understanding... But it will be already absolutely different, sad story.
© 1998-2016 FORUM.msk