home » Online services » What are the main legal problems of the Internet. Main legal issues related to the use of the Internet

What are the main legal problems of the Internet. Main legal issues related to the use of the Internet

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN THE INFORMATION AND TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK "INTERNET"

As a result of studying this chapter, the student should:

know main approaches to the definition of the legal concept of "Internet", features of the legal regulation of public relations in the global network, problems of restricting access to resources with information distributed in violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation, the role of the Internet in public administration, problems of access to legal information on the network;

be able to navigate in legal problems arising from the use of network technologies in the life of society, to correlate the trends in the development of information technologies with potential problems of legal regulation of the virtual space;

own the fundamental terminology of the section under study, the skills of analyzing educational and scientific literature, the means and methods of scientific research.

Problems of the legal definition of the concept of "Internet"

At the present stage of social development, the issues of legal regulation of information and communication technologies have acquired particular relevance. Great importance In the life of almost every inhabitant of our planet, the information and telecommunications network "Internet" is currently playing. Modern technologies communications and information processing, mobile telephony, etc., served as the basis for the fact that the Internet has become essential tool V Everyday life each of us. The revolutionary impact of the Internet affects the fields of education, labor activity, mutual communication, interaction with the state and other institutions of civil society. The Okinawa Charter for the Global Information Society of 2000 directed governments of all countries to promote efforts to strengthen relevant policies and regulatory frameworks that encourage competition and innovation, ensure economic and financial stability, and promote cooperation to optimize global networks, combating abuses that undermine the integrity of the network, to reduce the gap in digital technologies, investing in people and ensuring global access and participation in this process .

In the report of the UN General Assembly dated May 16, 2011, access to the information and telecommunications network "Internet" is classified as a basic (or inalienable) human right, and the restriction of access to it is recognized as a violation of basic human rights.

At present, such components of the global information society as e-government, cross-border e-commerce, global social media, streaming network broadcasting of television and radio programs and many more services based on network technologies for transmitting information. The influence of the Internet - the most famous and most global of telecommunications networks - extends to almost all social spheres and processes, which in turn requires a clear regulatory regulation of relations in the virtual space.

Despite the generally recognized benefits of the Internet, not all actions using it can be recognized as legal. Users began to actively use the possibilities of telecommunications to search for negative, harmful information; on the Internet, it became possible to commit such illegal actions as slander, insult, fraud, unfair advertising, deceit, etc.

Thus, it became urgently necessary for the state to interfere in the activities of Internet users. Indeed, such important tool building public relations in modern society cannot be left without adequate regulation by public authorities.

In the mid 2000s. the Russian legislator recognized that Internet relations should become the object of legal regulation. However, as correctly noted by I.M. Rassolov, at present the attention of the legislator and most researchers is directed to the settlement of private problems in Internet relations. And there is an acute problem of creating Internet law as a complex institution that is connected and interacts not only with information law, but also with private international law, public international law, civil, criminal and other branches of law 1 .

problem legislative regulation Internet relations, first of all, is the lack of an accurate legislative definition of the term "Internet", which would reflect its entire modern essence. Unfortunately, such a definition has not been developed by any science and most often the technical features of global information networks are used to describe it. The Internet is spoken of as “a worldwide system of interconnected computer networks for storing and transmitting information”, which does not fully reflect its essence, and such a definition cannot be fully used by legal science and practice.

P.U. Kuznetsov notes that one of the most urgent tasks of legal science at present is the mobilization of theoretical and methodological research aimed at comprehending new information phenomena and developing legal instruments (concepts, structures, etc.) corresponding to them. The science of information law is called upon to solve specific problems, among which the problem of the formation of the conceptual apparatus of information law stands out, including the development of the legal concept of "Internet".

Federal Law No. 149-FZ “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection” attempted to close this gap, but the legislator followed the well-trodden path of defining the term “Internet”, through its technical component. However, a legal definition of the global computer network has not yet been developed.

In our opinion, the legislator should have formulated the concept of "Internet" and included it in Art. 2 "Basic concepts..." federal law"About information..."

In this law, the “Internet” is mentioned through the concept of “information and telecommunications network” (part 5 of article 8) and then only in connection with the regulation of the right to access to information. The Internet as an international computer network is also mentioned in Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of March 17, 2008 No. 351 “On measures to ensure the information security of the Russian Federation when using information and telecommunication networks of international information exchange” (as amended on July 25, 2014) 1 .

The fact that such a position is outdated and does not meet the modern needs of society has been repeatedly stated. According to the Russian Association electronic communications(RAEC), there is an urgent need to replace the concept of "information and communication network" with "the Internet" .

We consider it necessary to understand the essence of the concept of "Internet" by analyzing the text of the federal law "On Information ...", according to which the "Internet" network is an information and telecommunication network, which is a technological system designed to transmit information over communication lines, with access to it means of computer technology.

Such a definition, in our opinion, is not entirely successful, since according to the normative technical documentation an information technology system is a set of information technology resources that provide services through one or more interfaces. At the same time, the concept of a technological system is even more limited - a finite set of production items and performers to be performed under regulated production conditions. Thus, the "Internet" network is a finite number of computers participating in any technological process. Such an understanding does not correspond to reality, since the main characteristics of the Internet are its infinity and multi-system nature.

In the "Model law on the basics of Internet regulation", adopted in St. Petersburg in May 2011 at the 36th plenary meeting of the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly of the CIS member states, a more reasonable definition of the Internet is given as a global information and telecommunications network that connects information systems and telecommunication networks of various countries through a global address space based on the use of Internet protocol complexes (Internet Protocol, IP) and data transfer protocol (Transmission Control Protocol, TCP) and providing the ability to implement various forms of communication, including posting information for an unlimited circle persons 1 .

Analyzing this definition, one can identify its dual nature, since the Internet, on the one hand, is referred to as technical system, and at the same time it is characterized as a global information space. Despite some "roughness" of this wording, it can still be taken as a basis for developing a modern definition of the Internet, but, unfortunately, the positive international experience was not taken into account by the Russian legislator.

Let us turn to the international experience in defining the concept of the Internet. In the Declaration of Principles "Building the Information Society - a global challenge in the new millennium", adopted at the World Summit on highest level on the Information Society in Geneva in 2003 and in Tunisia in 2005, stated that “the Internet has become a public resource global scope” and its regulation should be carried out by states, taking into account this particularity of it.

The Ninth UN World Internet Governance Forum (IGF), held from 2 to 5 September 2014 in Istanbul, fully confirmed the course developed by the international community in its decisions.

In the Russian Federation, work is underway to create a modern definition of the Internet. Thus, the draft “Concepts of legal relations arising from the use of the Internet in the Russian Federation (2013)”, proposed by the Presidential Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation, clearly indicates the need to develop a modern legal definition of the Internet 1 .

Most Russian legal scholars have come to the conclusion that when defining the concept of "Internet", it is necessary to move away from its technical fundamental principle.

THEM. Rassolov speaks of the Internet as a cybernetic space; I.L. Bachilo - as about the sphere of continuous information and communication process of processing information (information) in digital form; A.V. Minbaleev - as a virtual sphere in which mass communications find their real reflection and development in a variety of forms and manifestations, and in a narrow sense, as a set of information technologies, with the help of which the creation, placement and dissemination of information for an unlimited circle of people takes place.

There are other opinions as well. So, E.S. Andryushchenko proposes to consider the Internet as a global decentralized system of information and telecommunication networks connecting on the basis of common protocols Various types computers, and S.V. Petrovsky - as an international telecommunication network common use, intended for the exchange of machine-readable messages (data), i.e. information about the surrounding world, its objects, processes and phenomena, objectified in a form that allows their direct machine processing.

Thus, based on the analysis of various approaches to the Internet, the patterns of its construction and management, we can conclude that the legal definition of the Internet as an information space could solve the problem of describing its legal essence.

However, in the Russian legal science the prevailing view is that the Internet is not a legal phenomenon and cannot be a subject or object of law. We do not agree with this at all, since there is a specific relationship associated with working on the Internet. Its appearance and development introduces a lot of fundamentally new into the nature of the relationship between people and organizations that communicate with each other through the network. Wherein main goal current period is the legislative consolidation of the basics of regulating relations on the Internet, as well as the regulation of certain areas, parties, issues 1 .

At the same time, the mention of the Internet as a space can be found as separate novels in domestic legislation, for example, in the Concept for the Development of International Information Security prepared by the Security Council of the Russian Federation. Also, the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 1, 2012 No. 761 "On the National Strategy for Action in the Interests of Children for 2012-2017" refers to the rules safe behavior in the Internet space.

Okinawa Charter of the Global Information Society // Diplomatic Bulletin. 2000. No. 8. S. 51-56.
Rassolov I.M. Law and the Internet. Theoretical problems.
URL: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet
About Kuznetsov P.U. Social mission of the electronic state: values and terminological problems // Information society and welfare state: Collection of scientific works. Moscow: IGP RAN; IPO "At the Nikitsky Gates", 2011. P. 16.

LEGAL PROBLEMS OF INTERNET USE IN RUSSIA

OK. TERESHCHENKO
Tereshchenko Lyudmila Konstantinovna - leading researcher of IZiSP.
The legal problems of using global computer networks are most clearly manifested in the Internet due to its specificity. The Internet is a unique association of local, national and international computer networks, organizationally not being something of a single whole. It does not have a single owner or owner, no separate property, no control center. It is not a legal entity registered in any country and is not international organization.
For legal regulation, the question of the legal nature of the Internet is essential. Is this network a subject or an object of law? And is it possible in principle to carry out its legal regulation?
Based on the analysis of the emerging relations, it should be concluded that the Internet is not a legal problem. In fact, there is only the problem of legal regulation of the order, conditions for the use of telecommunication networks and protection of the rights and legitimate interests of various subjects in the circulation of information in global computer networks. However, it also needs to be worked out, since the process of active connection of Russian users to international networks, including the Internet, is practically irreversible, the number of users is steadily growing, and technological development is significantly ahead of the development of legislation in the relevant area.
Participants of parliamentary hearings on Internet problems in Russia, held in the State Duma in December 1996 by the State Duma committees on security and on information policy and communications, identified the following of them:
violation of intellectual property rights;
penetration into control systems;
dissemination of information that has a negative impact on the social health of society, including the uncontrolled distribution of offensive and obscene materials on the Internet and children's access to them;
dissemination of unfair advertising;
conducting fraudulent commercial operations with the construction of the type of pyramidal fraudulent structures;
unauthorized access to confidential information of legal entities and authorities;
violation of the rights and legitimate interests of the individual in the process of information exchange.
These problems, ultimately, can be reduced to three groups: a) protection of intellectual property rights; b) protection of the rights and legitimate interests of the individual, society and the state when using public computer networks; c) protection of information circulating in these networks.
The movement of information on the Internet, due to the specifics of this network, cannot be regulated by the legislation of any one country, since the computer space has no territorial boundaries. Nevertheless, individual issues can be resolved at the national level.
Protection of intellectual property rights. This group of problems is now particularly acute. Most often, copyright is violated on the Internet. This is due to the ease of copying copyright objects placed on a computer network, their transfer to any point on the globe without the knowledge of the author and further distribution, the impossibility of controlling each copying case.
If earlier information was practically inseparable from its material carrier, now electronic information carriers make it easy to reproduce objects of intellectual property. Through the Internet, any such object represented in electronic form, can be instantly played anywhere in the world. At the same time, it is almost impossible to track both the copying process itself and the number of copies.
Two directly opposite conclusions are drawn from the current situation:
the first is to practically give up protection by compensating for the loss of subjects of exclusive rights to objects of intellectual property with the help of concluded contracts for the provision of services;
the second is to strengthen and improve the protection of intellectual property objects and the rights of their creators in the context of global computer networks.
Arguments in favor of the first position are as follows. Since it is practically impossible to control copying, it is proposed in principle to change the nature of compensation for the costs of the creators of intellectual property objects - through contractual relations with customers, when there is not a transfer of exclusive rights or part of them, but the provision of services for user training, installation, use, adaptation, etc. P. objects of intellectual property, which become practically free.
The second position is based on the fact that until a reliable protection of intellectual property is created, the development of the international information network will be seriously hampered, and therefore it is necessary to intensify work within the framework of the World Copyright Organization - the development of standards for the protection of intellectual property in electronic commerce systems and global computer networks.
The orientation of the regulation of intellectual property protection at the international level is not accidental. Since the scope of copyright law is limited to the territory of a particular country, and the jurisdiction of one state does not extend to the territory of another state, national legislation cannot provide effective protection of intellectual property objects in global computer networks that are not limited to the territory of one state.
It is the international nature of computer networks that suggests solving emerging problems at the international level, which, however, does not remove the need to develop adequate national legislation. The ability to distribute information goods and services over the networks of other countries is directly related to the copyright laws adopted in these countries. As for the Russian legislation, the specifics of the distribution of intellectual property objects over computer networks have not yet been reflected in the legislation on the protection of copyright and related rights.
Protection of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and society when using public computer networks. Foreign practice of using the Internet allows us to conclude that violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens in public computer networks is potentially possible both on the part of individuals and government agencies. This concerns unlawful interference in the private life of a citizen by obtaining confidential information or by unauthorized publication of his personal data. In our country, the legislation on personal data is in the process of formation, especially since there are no mechanisms for protecting personal data in public computer networks. In the future, guarantees of a certain level of protection against interference in the private life of a citizen, regardless of who tries to do it, should be established.
Another aspect is the need to protect the individual, society from unscrupulous information that damages public morality, including pornography, or represents a public danger.
In this case, questions arise about the need to prohibit the placement of certain types of information in public computer networks, restrict access to other types of information, determine the subjects that should be held responsible for violation of established prohibitions, as well as the procedure for fixing violations in order to provide evidence of violations.
Certain changes in the legislation on mass media and on advertising are needed, taking into account the specifics of public computer networks, since the classical rules that govern the activities of ordinary mass media are often completely inapplicable due to their nature to the regulation of Internet media. For example, there are certain time restrictions on the dissemination of certain types of information. However, in the context of the Internet, which is universal in nature and allows information to be obtained at any time from places with different time zones, compliance with this requirement only by information providers turns out to be purely formal.
Today, there is also no solution to the issue of the subjects of responsibility for violating the established prohibitions regarding certain types of information, the delimitation of responsibility for placing them on a public computer network. Indeed, who should be responsible: the person who placed the relevant information on the network and which is far from always possible to establish, or the network service provider that provided services for placing information on the network?
There is a point of view according to which service providers should not be held liable for the content of the posted information or additional liability conditions should be established, for example, in cases where the operator knew about the violations and had the opportunity and ability to prevent the posting. This position is explained by the fact that the amount of information in the systems of providers is so large that it is impossible to view everything. In addition, it is not always possible to determine whether there has been a violation of the law. These issues can be regulated by legislation that establishes the status and conditions for the activities of service providers providing services for access to computer networks, including the Internet.
Solving the problem of liability is complicated by the fact that only detecting an intruder on the Internet is not enough, it is much more difficult to collect and consolidate evidence of an offense or crime that took place in a telecommunications network, and this must be done in such a way that the court considers the evidence admissible in accordance with procedural legislation.
In the domestic judicial practice Internet misconduct disputes have already been dealt with, and one of the main problems has been the problem of evidence. Information on the server can be deleted at any time. It is practically impossible to prove its presence on the server at a certain time. Witness testimony will not help in this case. In this regard, the proposal to create an independent organization that could, at the request of citizens, state bodies, and any interested parties, record the content of certain pages on the Internet in order to obtain evidence of the existence of specific facts is quite justified. However, the solution of this problem requires the introduction of appropriate changes in the procedural legislation.
Another group of problems is related to the possibility of violation of rights and legitimate interests through unauthorized access to information circulating in open computer networks. This is obtaining information about other people's accounts, theft of credit card data, dishonest participation in e-commerce, which is gaining huge scale abroad, the development of which is connected not only with technology, but also with the law. The current legislation only to a small extent takes into account the possibility and features of e-commerce.
Information protection in global computer networks. The problem of information security in global computer networks exists both for government agencies and for individuals and organizations, however, approaches to its solution cannot be the same for these groups of subjects.
A number of potential hazards are identified in relation to the Internet system. This is unauthorized access of external users to any type of service provided to domestic legal users, violation of the confidentiality of the information exchange of Russian citizens and organizations, import of destructive software products into the Russian information system, deliberate distortion of information systems software in order to change the functions they perform and disorganize work, including decommissioning.
Interested Russian departments insist that working on the Internet requires the organization of a comprehensive, multi-level protection system for all subjects. Along with this basic principle of ensuring information security, it is also assumed the use of individual means of protection on each computer. Another requirement aimed at ensuring information security: the use of foreign-made information security tools among Russian users of the Internet, primarily in government agencies, must be strictly regulated. The use of such means of protection is possible only if they pass the procedure of mandatory certification for compliance with information security requirements.
The creation of information security systems is an urgent task, however, it should be borne in mind that the Internet system is designed to transmit only open information. Therefore, the most reliable means of protecting information, unauthorized access to which can harm the interests of the state, individual, organization, is not to place it on a computer that is connected to the Internet, and on a local network that is connected to the Internet. The organization of work with the Internet should exclude the possibility of penetration into the databases of local networks where restricted information circulates, including state secrets and any proprietary information.
The state must ensure the security of the participation of state structures in the functioning of the Internet and create conditions for the protection of information for non-state structures, which must retain the right to choose the means of information security and the degree of necessary protection.
This can be facilitated by the development of uniform for the whole of Russia technical requirements on the equipment of subscriber points of the Internet system, which would be mandatory for state bodies and organizations, as well as for those non-state structures that received a state order, including defense. For the rest, these requirements would be advisory.
In addition to technical requirements for the equipment of subscriber points of the Internet system, it would be advisable to prepare a normative act regulating the procedure and conditions for connecting state structures to the Internet, taking into account security and observing the interests of society.
The problem of information protection in public computer networks can be solved at the legislative level. Just as with regard to technical requirements, mandatory requirements and restrictions should be established for state bodies and organizations, while non-state structures should only be encouraged, but not forced, to take measures to protect information. Non-state structures, commercial computer networks, users and network providers have the right to independently decide the issues of ensuring the security of their networks, servers and information, unless otherwise expressly provided by law for specific cases. For providers, the protection of information from a right should turn into a duty if the user of the network insists on protecting information.
From the foregoing, we can conclude that there are no special legal problems of the Internet. But in connection with the development of the Internet and other international computer networks and the connection of Russian telecommunications networks to them, a lot of legal problems of various severity appear in completely different areas of activity, and only a part of them can be resolved within the framework of national legislation.
The most urgent is the improvement of legislation in the field of protection of intellectual property rights used on the Internet, adjustment of the legislation on mass media regarding the legal status of electronic publications and electronic media and their activities in public computer networks; determination of the special legal status of organizations and individuals providing communication, information and other services using telecommunications; various aspects of protecting both the information itself and society from "harmful" information.
Since the information space of the Internet has no state borders, a significant part of the problems that arise can only be solved at the international level (both through the conclusion of bilateral and multilateral agreements, and through the development of international legal norms that determine the rules for the functioning of the Internet as a single international telecommunications exchange network). information).
Almost all the proposals contained in the recommendations of the parliamentary hearings turned out to be unrealized for various reasons. Meanwhile, in recent years the number of Russian Internet users has increased significantly, many problems have moved from the category of theoretical to practical ones. It would be advisable to determine the priorities for their solution in a special program for ensuring the information security of computer networks.
Journal of Russian Law, N 7-8, 1999

Until recently, United States Internet law has had two main legal regulations, adopted in 1996 ("Telecommunications Act of 1996" as an addition to the federal law "Communications Act of 1934" in the form of a new paragraph 230 "Protection of personal blocking and protection from offensive material") and relating to the content of information resources on the Internet.

The first rule specifies that neither the provider nor the user of an interactive computer service is responsible for the content of information published by another provider. The second norm removes from the provider any responsibility for actions to restrict access to information that he regards as offensive, deceitful, promoting violence, etc., as well as for actions to distribute funds intended for the implementation of these actions. Despite the fact that such approaches were very liberal, the public reaction was ambiguous and these norms were initially regarded as an interference with the "sovereignty" of Internet users.

A significant set of regulatory documents that have a decisive influence on the legal norms of European countries in the field of the Internet are regulations European Parliament and Council of Europe. Among these documents, it is necessary to highlight the Directive "On the processing of personal data and the protection of private interests in the field of telecommunications", the draft Directive "On a number of legal aspects of electronic commerce in the internal market". These documents form the basis of the European legislative framework in the field of the Internet in terms of information exchange and electronic commerce. The first directive deals with the relationship between service providers in the public telecommunications network and the end users of these services. The main questions addressed in it are:

Safety. The service provider is responsible for ensuring the information security of its services, if required, in cooperation with the owner of the public telecommunications network.

Confidentiality of telecommunications.

List of data related to the consumer and the service provided to him (number and identifier of his computer station, address, contract number, information about contacts with the service provider, payments, etc.), the conditions for their use and storage by the service provider, as well as the obligations of the provider data destruction services.

The rights of a consumer (user of a public telecommunications network) in relation to their personal data, which are placed in electronic or printed directories intended for general use.

The second most significant precedent in foreign legislation governing the Internet was the German "Multimedia Law". In contrast to the American approach, German legislators hold service providers liable for content provided by a third party, if they are aware of this content and blocking it is technically possible and justified. Here, in an imperative form, the provider is required to block "illegal" information. The law also makes the service provider responsible for the content of the "own" information they provide for use. The law exempts service providers from liability for content provided by a third party only if they only provide access to the information.

In addition to the United States and Germany, many national laws deal with the regulation of the Internet. Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Italy, Luxembourg, Malaysia, South Korea, Australia, Singapore have adopted relevant laws or prepared their own bills in this area.

Similar to the legal systems of other states Russian legislation in the field of the Internet is at a very early stage of development.

The absence of legislative acts on the development of the Internet in Russia, as well as the possibility of their effective application, is already negatively affecting the development of public relations (for example, in the field of exercising the rights of citizens to information, preventing the dissemination of information affecting the honor and dignity of citizens, protecting intellectual property in other spheres of social and political life). Moreover, as relations related to the Internet become involved in the economic turnover, the lack of a legal framework for such activities can not only become a brake on economic development, but also to force Russian Internet users to apply for relevant services to specialized organizations outside of Russia, which, taking into account the specifics of the Internet, can be easily implemented.

Among the main problems that need to be resolved as soon as possible in order to prevent the Russian segment of the Internet from lagging behind global trends and to ensure the protection of the state interests of the Russian Federation in this area, many experts include * (125):

definition public policy Russian Federation in relation to the development of the Russian segment of the global information network Internet; solution at the international level of issues of state jurisdiction in relation to various segments of the Internet;

ensuring free access of Russian users to the Internet and relevant network information resources, as well as unhindered information exchange, including international;

determining the procedure and conditions for connecting state bodies to the Internet (including for the purpose of providing citizens with information about the activities of these bodies), as well as institutions of libraries, schools and other institutions of the socio-cultural sphere;

determination of the legal regime of information posted on the Internet or transmitted through the means of exchange provided on the Internet;

prevention of socially dangerous acts committed on the Internet (in particular, the dissemination of offensive and obscene information, anti-social appeals), as well as the creation of regulatory conditions for the effective identification and punishment of perpetrators of such offenses;

protection of personal data, in particular those data about Internet users that are collected in the course of their interaction with each other and with Internet service operators;

creation of regulatory conditions for electronic document management in the Internet; establishment of principles and procedures for the use of the Internet address space; confirmation of the authenticity and authorship of information in information products, means of viewing and transmitting information;

providing a regulatory framework for e-commerce; recognition of legal force for transactions made on the Internet; determination of the procedure for the production of electronic payments;

ensuring information security (in particular, preventing the spread of computer viruses over the Internet, preventing

unauthorized access to information); establishing the procedure for applying cryptographic protection tools in relation to the use of the Internet.

Legal information systems

A special type of information systems are systems focused on solving national problems. An example of such information systems are legal information systems.

As a result of the implementation of the legal informatization program, several non-state information retrieval systems for legal information have been formed in the country. Among them are such companies as the research and production enterprise "Garant-Service", "ConsultantPlus", "Kodeks", "Inventa", "Intralex". Total number of computer legal systems, including and local networks, based on the distributed reference systems mentioned above, is hundreds of thousands. Each of them has its own profile. For example, "ConsultantPlus" includes systems such as: "Version Prof", which contains federal legislation; "Expert application" containing all acts of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, not included in the information bank "Version Prof", as well as other documents relating to individual sectors of the economy, specific territories and organizations; "Russian Legislation", which contains normative and other legal acts of a general nature, regulating the most significant public relations in all sectors economic activity; as well as other information banks. Regularly, under the terms of the contract, the systems of collective and private users are updated. The system data is updated daily on the Internet.

The company "ConsultantPlus" issues a monthly newsletter "ConsultantPlus", which publishes information about changes in legislation, interviews with experts and their advice on certain areas of legislation and regulations. Reviews of the work of various courts of the Russian Federation are also published. On a weekly basis, under the terms of the contract, the systems of collective and private users are updated. The system data is updated daily on the Internet.

In reference legal system "Garant" more strict orientation to branches of the legislation is carried out. Its structure includes four blocks or groups of information: legal bases; Electronic archive; library (paper documents); guides and programs on legal topics that are distributed to users. The Russian legislation of this reference system is presented on the Internet. For example, the Reuters agency broadcasts news of Russian legislation based on data coming from the Garant network.

All reference legal systems do a lot of consulting work, choosing their specific profile. For example, the Inventa system provides training in decision making using Internet resources. The same company provides tracking services outside world legal information, which includes: tracking corporate information system, tracking personal information system, tracking Internet directory.

Another task is solved by the legal information agency Intralex on the basis of the USIS system. This is the beginning of the solution of expert-analytical problems according to the interests of the user when using the database on the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Mental viruses

A mental virus is a phenomenon that can infect people with memes. (Meme (English meme) is a unit of cultural information. A meme can be any idea, symbol, manner or mode of action, consciously or unconsciously transmitted from person to person through speech, writing, video, rituals, gestures, etc.). In turn, memes influence the behavior of infected people in order to prolong their lives and spread the virus.

Consciousness, noosphere and information field for psychic viruses are the nutrient medium necessary for their vital activity. The contact of viruses with consciousness often leads to the emergence of a virtual monster: an infected consciousness.

Most in a simple way the spread of many viruses of consciousness are obscene jokes, rumors, gossip. They are spreading through the media at an alarming rate. Primitive obscene humor encourages the spread of a dangerous contagion of consciousness, causing base emotions. Countless vulgar stories from the life of "stars" of show business and politicians, replicated by the yellow press - powerful vehicle the spread of mental viruses. They demonstrate all the main properties of the virus: the ability to copy, appeal to the lower layers of consciousness, erosion of the body's natural protective barriers that resist mental infection.

Viruses that penetrate the mind cause a malfunction in the body, redirecting and dispersing energy flows.

Here is a diagram of the action of mental viruses:

adsorption - the penetration of viruses into consciousness (each type of virus is characterized by its own in an individual way penetration);

transcription (the beginning of the implementation of viral information) - translation (the process of translating viral information directly into consciousness);

replication (multiplication) - the assembly of viral particles - the exit from the consciousness of a new population of viruses in order to further spread.

41) Among the national interests of Russia, as, indeed, of other states, a special place is occupied by the realization of the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens in the information sphere. It is based on the principles of freedom of information and the prohibitive principle of law (everything that is not prohibited by law is allowed). This principle is enshrined in major international legal documents, the Constitution of the Russian Federation and a number of other laws. This right includes the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. The Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993) also enshrines these rights and freedoms: -the right to immunity private life, personal and family secrets, protection of one's honor and good name - part 1 of Art. 23;

The right to secrecy of correspondence, telephone conversations, postal, telegraphic and other communications - Part 2 of Art. 23;

Freedom of thought and speech - part 1 of Art. 29;

Freedom of the mass media - Part 5 of Art. 29;

The right to freedom of expression of one's opinions and beliefs (no one can be forced to express their opinions and beliefs or to renounce them) - Part 3 of Art. 29;

The right to freely seek, receive, transmit, produce and distribute information in any legal way - Part 4 of Art. 29;

The right of citizens to apply personally, as well as to send individual and collective appeals to state bodies and bodies local government- art. 33;

Freedom of all types of creativity - part 1 of Art. 44;

The right to access cultural property - Part 2 of Art. 44.

42) Federal Law No. 149-FZ of July 27, 2006 (as amended on December 19, 2016) "On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection" (as amended and supplemented, effective from January 1, 2017) 1) information - information (messages, data) regardless of the form of their presentation;

2) information technologies - processes, methods of searching, collecting, storing, processing, providing, disseminating information and methods for implementing such processes and methods; This Federal Law governs relations arising from:

1) exercising the right to search, receive, transfer, produce and disseminate information;

2) application of information technologies;

3) ensuring the protection of information.

Principles of legal regulation of relations in the field of information, information technology and information protection

Legal regulation of relations arising in the field of information, information technology and information protection is based on the following principles:

1) freedom to search, receive, transfer, produce and distribute information in any legal way;

2) establishment of restrictions on access to information only by federal laws;

3) openness of information about the activities of state bodies and local governments and free access to such information, except in cases established by federal laws;

4) equality of languages of the peoples of the Russian Federation in the creation of information systems and their operation;

5) ensuring the security of the Russian Federation in the creation of information systems, their operation and protection of the information contained in them;

Electronic signature

An electronic signature (ES) is a special document attribute that allows you to establish the absence of information distortion in an electronic document from the moment the ES was formed and confirm that the ES belongs to the owner. The attribute value is obtained as a result of cryptographic transformation of information.

An electronic signature certificate is a document that confirms that the public key (verification key) of the ES belongs to the owner of the certificate. Certificates are issued by certification authorities (CAs) or their trusted representatives.

The owner of the ES certificate is an individual in whose name the ES certificate was issued in the certification center. Each owner of the certificate has two ES keys in his hands: private and public.

The private key of the electronic signature (ES key) allows you to generate an electronic signature and sign an electronic document. The owner of the certificate is required to keep his private key secret.

The public key of the electronic signature (ES verification key) is unambiguously associated with the private key of the ES and is designed to authenticate the ES.

Principles of using an electronic signature

The principles of using an electronic signature are:

1) the right of participants in electronic interaction to use an electronic signature of any kind at their own discretion, if the requirement to use a specific type of electronic signature in accordance with the purposes of its use is not provided for by federal laws or regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with them or by an agreement between participants in electronic interaction;

2) the possibility for participants to use electronic interaction at their own discretion, any information technology and/or technical means, allowing you to meet the requirements of this Federal

law applicable to the use specific types electronic signatures;

3) the inadmissibility of recognizing an electronic signature and (or) an electronic document signed by it as null and void only on the basis that such an electronic signature was not created by one's own hand, but using electronic signature tools for the automatic creation and (or) automatic verification of electronic signatures in information system.

According to Federal Law No. 63-FZ "On Electronic Signature", there is a division into:

a simple electronic signature;

· enhanced unqualified electronic signature;

Enhanced qualified electronic signature.

Simple electronic signature is an electronic signature, which, through the use of codes, passwords or other means, confirms the fact of the formation of an electronic signature by a certain person.

An unqualified electronic signature is an electronic signature that is: obtained as a result of cryptographic transformation of information using a signature key; allows you to identify the person who signed the electronic document; allows you to detect the fact of making changes to an electronic document after signing it; created using electronic signature tools.

A qualified electronic signature corresponds to all the features of an unqualified electronic signature. In addition, the verification key for such a signature is specified in the qualified certificate, and electronic signature tools that have received confirmation of compliance with the requirements established in accordance with this federal law are used to create and verify an electronic signature.

Using a simple electronic signature

1. An electronic document is considered signed with a simple electronic signature if one of the following conditions is met:

1) a simple electronic signature is contained in the electronic document itself;

2) the key of a simple electronic signature is applied in accordance with the rules established by the operator of the information system, with the use of which the creation and (or) sending of an electronic document is carried out, and the created and (or) sent electronic document contains information indicating the person on whose behalf an electronic document has been created and (or) sent.

2. Regulatory legal acts and (or) agreements between participants in electronic interaction, establishing cases of recognition of electronic documents signed with a simple electronic signature as equivalent to paper documents signed with a handwritten signature, should provide, in particular:

1) rules for determining the person signing an electronic document by his simple electronic signature;

2) the obligation of a person creating and (or) using a simple electronic signature key to keep it confidential.

3. The rules established by Articles 10-18 of this Federal Law do not apply to relations associated with the use of a simple electronic signature, including the creation and use of a simple electronic signature key.

4. The use of a simple electronic signature for signing electronic documents containing information constituting a state secret, or in an information system containing information constituting a state secret, is not allowed.

SCOPE OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE

1. Electronic document management. ES technology is widely used in electronic document management systems for various purposes: external and internal exchange, organizational and administrative, personnel, legislative, commercial and industrial and other

2. Electronic reporting for regulatory authorities.

3. public services. Every citizen of the Russian Federation can obtain an electronic signature to receive public services. With the help of ES, a citizen can certify documents and applications sent to departments in electronic form.

form, as well as receive signed letters and notifications that the appeal has been accepted for consideration from the relevant authorities. 4. Electronic trading. Electronic auctions are held on special platforms (websites). An electronic signature is required by suppliers at government and commercial sites. EDS of suppliers and customers guarantee participants that they are dealing with real offers. In addition, the concluded contracts acquire legal force only when it is signed by both parties.

5. Arbitration Court. In the event of any disputes between organizations, as evidence in court, electronic documents. According to the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, received by facsimile, electronic or other communication, signed with an electronic signature or other analogue of a handwritten signature, are written evidence.

6. Document flow with individuals. Admittedly, this area of application of EP is very specific and is rarely used yet, however, it is possible. With the help of ES, individuals can certify various documents. Thanks to this possibility, remote workers on the basis of service contracts, for example, can issue acceptance certificates for work in in electronic format.

Until recently, United States Internet law was governed by two major legal provisions adopted in 1996 (the "Tescottishca1:yn8 Act of 1996" as an addendum to the Federal Communications Act of 1934 in the form of a new paragraph 230 "Protection of Personal blocking and protection from offensive materials”) and related to the content of information resources on the Internet.

The first rule specifies that neither the provider nor the user of an interactive computer service is responsible for the content of information published by another provider.

The second norm removes from the provider any responsibility for actions to restrict access to information that he regards as offensive, deceitful, promoting violence, etc., as well as for actions to distribute funds intended for the implementation of these actions. Despite the fact that such approaches were very liberal, the public reaction turned out to be ambiguous, and these norms were initially regarded as an interference with the “sovereignty” of Internet users.

An essential set of normative documents that have a decisive influence on the legal norms of European countries in the field of the Internet are the normative documents of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe. Among these documents, it is necessary to single out the Directive “On the processing of personal data and the protection of private interests in the field of telecommunications”, the draft Directive “On a number of legal aspects of electronic commerce in the internal market”. These documents form the basis of the European legislative framework in the field of the Internet in terms of information exchange and electronic commerce. The first directive deals with the relationship between service providers in the public telecommunications network and the end users of these services. The main questions discussed in it:

Safety. The service provider is responsible for ensuring the information security of its services, if required, in cooperation with the owner of the public telecommunications network.

Confidentiality of telecommunications.

The rights of a consumer (user of a public telecommunications network) in relation to their personal data, which are placed in electronic or printed directories intended for general use.

The second most significant precedent in foreign legislation regulating the field of the Internet was the German "Multimedia Law". In contrast to the American approach, German legislators hold service providers liable for content provided by a third party, if they are aware of this content and blocking it is technically possible and justified. Here, in an imperative form, the provider is required to block "illegal" information. The law also makes the service provider responsible for the content of the "own" information they provide for use. The law exempts service providers from liability for content provided by a third party only if they only provide access to the information.

Like the legislative systems of other states, Russian legislation in the field of the Internet is at the very initial stage of development.

The absence of legislative acts on the development of the Internet in Russia, as well as the possibility of their effective application, is already negatively affecting the development of public relations (for example, in the field of exercising the rights of citizens to information, preventing the dissemination of information affecting the honor and dignity of citizens, protecting intellectual property , in other areas socio-political life). Moreover, as relations related to the Internet become involved in the economic turnover, the lack of a legal framework for such activities can not only become a brake on economic development, but also force Russian Internet users to apply for relevant services to specialized organizations outside of Russia, which, taking into account the specifics of the Internet can be easily implemented.

determination of the state policy of the Russian Federation regarding the development of the Russian segment of the global information network Internet; solution at the international level of issues of state jurisdiction in relation to various segments of the Internet;

ensuring free access of Russian users to the Internet and relevant network information resources, as well as unhindered information exchange, including international one;

determination of the legal regime of information posted on the Internet or transmitted through the means of exchange provided on the Internet;

protection of personal data, in particular those data about Internet users that are collected in the course of their interaction with each other and with Internet service operators;

creation of regulatory conditions for electronic document management on the Internet; establishment of principles and procedures for the use of the Internet address space; confirmation of the authenticity and authorship of information in information products, means of viewing and transmitting information;

providing a regulatory framework for e-commerce; recognition of legal force for transactions made on the Internet; determination of the procedure for the production of electronic payments;

ensuring information security (in particular, preventing the spread of computer viruses over the Internet, preventing unauthorized access to information); establishing the procedure for applying cryptographic protection means in relation to the use of the Internet.

Recently, attempts have been made to legally address some of these problems.

So, one of the most serious problems today is spam - a mass unsolicited mailing, as a rule, of an advertising nature.

It is precisely because of its mass character that spam causes such huge damage to the global economy in general and to each user in particular. According to the report “Spam: Key Trends in the Second Quarter of 2006”, published by Kaspersky Lab, in the second quarter of 2006, the share of spam in Runet was at least 70% of the total volume of mail traffic. By the end of the second quarter, the proportion of spam in the overall mail flow increased to 82.2%.

Different sources give different figures showing how much time a user spends processing (reading, confidently identifying and deleting) one spam email - from 4 to 84 seconds. A survey conducted in May 2004 by Nucleus Research showed that on average each office worker receives 29 spam emails daily and spends about 30 seconds processing each email. That is, it turns out that employees spent 3.1% of their working time “processing” spam and the damage amounted to $1934 per employee per year.

But do not forget that not only the loss of working time consists of the damage from spam. The final figure should add the costs of traffic, hardware and software, which handles spam traffic, wages administrators, as well as such hard-to-calculate parameters as lost profits and the risk of infection with a virus (it's no secret that malware is sent along with spam mailings).

They began to fight against him, and the fight goes on two directions - technical and legal. Technical Methods struggle, such as filtering correspondence with special programs, have become quite effective. However, filtering can protect the recipient from part of the incoming unsolicited messages, but cannot deal with the phenomenon as such.

The United States was the first to realize that the problem of spam could not be solved without the passage of laws establishing clear rules for sending advertising messages by e-mail. Nevada was the first state to pass legislation to curb spam. Back in July 1997, Nevada passed a law restricting the sending of unsolicited commercial emails. After the introduction of the law, such letters had to contain at the beginning of the line "subject" - an indication of the advertising nature of the message by including the letters of the word "ADVERTISEMENT" (advertising) or the abbreviation "ADV". In addition, such messages were to include the sender's name, postal and email address, and instructions on how to opt out of further receipt of such letters from the sender. The law prohibited the falsification of the sender's email address, and also prohibited any software designed for such falsification.

Over the next 5 years, similar laws were passed in almost all states.

A common feature of all laws was the observance of the principle of opt-out or “replies”, i.e. letters could be sent, but had to contain instructions on how the recipient could opt out of further receipt of such letters.

Some states criminalize gross violations of spam control laws, such as California, Colorado, Louisiana. In a number of states, the recipients of such messages are given the opportunity to demand from the sender a sum for each received message that violates the law. Amounts range from $10 per message received in Iowa, Nevada, and North Carolina to $1,000 in California.

At the same time, the growing problem of spam has led to the need for a federal law to restrict such mailings. The Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act was passed in 2003. The Act was abbreviated as the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, which can be translated as the Spam Act.

The Anti-Spam Act states that a letter may be sent to a recipient without prior authorization, but must include instructions to stop receiving unsolicited messages and the sender's address. In addition, unsolicited messages must be marked in a special way so that filters can filter out such correspondence. It is prohibited by law to indicate in the "subject" field information that may be misleading about the nature of the letter received.

The maximum penalty for said violations in some cases, there may be imprisonment for up to 5 years and a fine. The law provides for recipients to sue for $250 for each letter received that was sent in violation of the law. Providers and the prosecutor also have the right to apply to the court. The maximum amount of the claim cannot exceed $2 million, however, the court may triple the amount of the claim if it determines that the violator acted intentionally or committed several violations of the law when sending. In addition, the violator may be charged legal costs, including the costs of a lawyer, which can be a very significant amount.

Legislation in European countries has developed in a slightly different way, in particular the principle of prior consent has historically become much more widespread than in the United States.

In Austria it is forbidden to send e-mails without the prior consent of consumers. For other recipients, such mailing is allowed if the message specifies the “unsubscribe” procedure. This rule applies not only to e-mail, but also to SMS messages.

In Finland, the prior consent of an individual is required to receive advertising information. Sending advertising information to legal entities is possible without their prior consent, but with the possibility of "unsubscribe".

Other countries are also developing legislation to curb spam, with bills including the principle of recipients' prior consent to receive. In particular, such bills have been developed in Great Britain and Spain.

The European Union has adopted several directives related to telecommunications and e-commerce. Directive 2002/58/EC of 12 July 2002 regarding the storage of personal data and the secrecy of correspondence in electronic communications is most closely related to the problem under consideration.

The directive expressly provides for the need to obtain the recipient's prior consent before sending a promotional message by electronic means, whether it be automatic dialing equipment, fax, e-mail or SMS.

At the same time, the Directive allows the sending of commercial offers to persons with whom previously established business relationship. In this case, it is allowed to send offers for goods and services similar to those provided earlier, but only the person who has already provided such goods or services has the right to send such messages.

The first legislative step in the fight against this, of course, a harmful phenomenon in Russia was the adoption of the new Federal Law of March 13, 2006 No. 38-FZ “On Advertising”.

From the moment the Law came into force on July 1, 2006, the dissemination of advertising over telecommunication networks, including through the use of telephone, facsimile, mobile radiotelephone communications, is allowed only with the prior consent of the subscriber or addressee to receive advertising. At the same time, advertising is recognized as distributed without the prior consent of the subscriber or addressee, unless the advertiser proves that such consent has been obtained. The advertiser is obliged to immediately stop the distribution of advertising to the person who has addressed him with such a demand (Part 1, Article 18 of the Federal Law "On Advertising").

In addition, Part 2 of Art. 18 of the Federal Law "On Advertising" establishes a ban on the use of telecommunication networks for the dissemination of advertising using means of choice and (or) dialing a subscriber number without human intervention (automatic dialing, automatic mailing).

Advertising that does not meet the above requirements is inappropriate. By general rule persons whose rights and interests have been violated as a result of the dissemination of improper advertising have the right to apply in accordance with the established procedure to the court or arbitration court, including claims for damages, including lost profits, for compensation for harm caused to the health of individuals and (or) property of individuals or legal entities, on compensation for non-pecuniary damage (part 2 of article 38 of the Federal Law "On Advertising").

What are the main legal problems of the Internet. Main legal issues related to the use of the Internet

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN THE INFORMATION AND TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK "INTERNET"

Problems of the legal definition of the concept of "Internet"

LEGAL PROBLEMS OF INTERNET USE IN RUSSIA

More on the topic 11.2. The main legal problems of the Internet in our country and abroad:

Popular