Russian bill on the “right to oblivion” passed on first reading contrary to Internet companies

    The bill on the right to oblivion was adopted on first reading . Its essence is to allow users to request the removal of links to false, outdated (more than three years) or "distributed in violation of the law" information about them. Data on outstanding criminal records and criminal or administrative offenses for which the statute of limitations has not expired shall not be deleted. 423 deputies voted “for”, 26 did not vote, and deputy Dmitry Gudkov opposed.

    In order to make a request, a citizen must indicate his contact details, the reason for the removal and the information itself, subject to “oblivion”. After that, within three days the search company has the right to clarify the requirement. If the search engine refuses to execute it, a citizen can go to court.

    The bill is still opposed by the largest Internet companies operating in Russia: Yandex , Google , Rambler & Co and Mail.ru. Yandex is sure that the innovations contradict Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Article 8 of the Law on Information.

    The publication Roem.ru cites representatives of Yandex about the project:

    1. It does not solve its goals at all - restricting the dissemination of information on the citizen on the Internet, “which is unreliable, irrelevant or distributed in violation of the law” and “protecting honor, dignity and business reputation citizens ";

    2. contains obvious contradictions to the current Russian legislation;

    3. unreasonably and disproportionately restricts the rights of citizens to search for information and access to it;

    4. offers to transfer the functions of courts or law enforcement agencies to commercial organizations - search engines;

    5. Introduces a clear imbalance between private and public interests;

    6. Does not take into account the principles of the search engines and the technical features of the development of the Internet;

    7. It is fundamentally different from the decision of the European Court, to which the authors of the bill refer and which in itself is the subject of serious criticism.

    Also popular now: