Publication of the draft Terms and conditions of domain names registration in domains .RU and .РФ triggered a stormy debate in the Internet community. During the R&C process, the CC received dozens of comments from the users, which involve various aspects of “domain law”. In order to ensure no question remained unanswered, the CC is publishing a series of interviews with industry experts: most urgent issues the users raised will be commented by the experts who directly participated in the development of the Terms and conditions. Today, Mr. Maxim Bobin, Member of the CC’s Board, answers such questions as: why does domain .РФ need updated Terms and conditions; why is SMS domain activation required and whether the provisions of the law on personal data are incorporated in the new text of the Terms and conditions.
The CC: What factors triggered development of the new “domain” procedures?
M. Bobin: Problems, which popped up at the launch of zone .РФ, were openly discussed. I think they were caused by shortcomings in the existing procedures. Moreover, prior to the launch of domain .РФ, there were a number of problems, which were impossible to visualize at the time of development of the first version of the Terms and conditions for domain .РФ. For example, whether the domain administrator should be held responsible for materials posted on the site by third persons, in other words, the issue of the user generated content. These factors generated the crying need to amend the procedures.
The CC: What should the end users expect from the adoption of the new Terms and conditions and what will be new for the users? How is the registrar business going to change?
M.B.: The average user rarely reads the procedures carefully. That’s why I strongly doubt that users will face any problems or difficulties. Everything will remain the same. Will the registrar’s business undergo changes? Again I’m not sure that new procedures will dramatically affect them. Rather, we should wait for the outcome of the case on RU-CENTR registrar, I mean the FAS’s verdict, which the registrar challenges in the court, as well as all other “gestures” related to this case.
The CC: Why is SMS domain activation required now? Many users claim that this is slamming. However, on the other hand, many Russian portals apply this method of verification of “user’s validity”, for instance, VKontakte.
M.B.: The question contains the reply – the SMS activation is recently becoming a de facto standard. This verification method is used both by social networks, email services and many other services in the Internet. I don’t think it will detonate “wide-scale” protests, especially given that this simple method can indeed improve the services’ security.
The CC: Does new Terms and conditions correlate with the law on personal data? Will new procedures enhance the implementation of provisions of this law regarding protection of users’ personal data?
M.B.: the Terms and conditions have undoubtedly been developed to meet the provisions of the law on personal data. Another thing is that I, as a lawyer with the 17 year-long record, believe that the law does not reflect business realities and it is simply impossible to comply with it at 100%. Unfortunately, the issue of a poor quality legislation is still highly relevant to Russia. Time will tell how the registrar business adjusts to requirements of the law on personal data.
The CC: Item 5.5 of the Terms and conditions holds that the domain delegation may be terminated by the registrar on the basis of a written resolution issued by the head (deputy head or an equivalent official) of a law-enforcement agency. Will this not lead to the abuse of office by law enforcement agencies and, ultimately, is it not an attempt to impede the freedom of speech
M.B.: Yes, this is the time bomb. On the one hand, this situation, particularly given our domestic political realities, can be used headstrong. On the other hand, law enforcement agencies sought for this law for many years. They too can be understood: it often occurs that once certain materials are posted on the Internet, access to them should really be immediately banned. However, unfortunately, there are no effective mechanisms to FILTER materials which contain, say, scenes of violence or even scenes of murder, and materials criticizing a current political power. The aforementioned provision may help to combat both “perpetrators” and political opponents alike.
