Until recently, the legislation of the United States of America in the field of the Internet had two main legal norms adopted in 1996 (“Telesottishsa1:up8 Act of 1996” as additions to the federal law “Communications Act of 1934” in the form of a new paragraph 230 “Protection of personal blocking and protection from offensive materials") 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 relieves the provider of any responsibility for actions to limit access to information that he regards as offensive, false, promoting violence, etc., as well as for actions to distribute tools intended for carrying out these actions. Despite the fact that such approaches were very liberal, public reaction was mixed 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 ecommerce on the domestic market." These documents form the basis of the European legislative framework in the field of the Internet from the standpoint of information exchange and e-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 issues discussed in it:

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

Telecommunications confidentiality.

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.), conditions for their use and storage by the service provider, as well as the obligations of the supplier data destruction services.

Rights of a consumer (user of a public telecommunications network) in relation to his personal data, which is posted in electronic or printed directories intended for public use.

The second most significant precedent in foreign legislation regulating the Internet was the German “Multimedia Law”. In contrast to the American approach, German legislators hold service providers responsible for content provided by third parties if they are aware of the content and blocking it is technically possible and reasonable. 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 “proprietary” information they make available for use. The law only exempts service providers from liability for content provided by third parties if they only provide access to the information.

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

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

The lack of legislative acts on the development of the Internet in Russia, as well as the possibility of their effective application, is already having a negative impact on the development of public relations (for example, in the field of exercising citizens’ rights 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 economic turnover, the lack of a legal framework for such activities can not only become a hindrance for economic development, but also to force Russian Internet users to seek appropriate services from specialized organizations outside Russia, which, taking into account the specifics of the Internet, can be easily implemented.

Among the main problems that need prompt regulatory regulation to prevent the Russian segment of the Internet from falling behind global trends and to ensure protection state interests Russian Federation in this area, many experts include:

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

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

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

determination of the legal regime of information posted on the Internet or transmitted through 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, antisocial calls), as well as the creation of regulatory conditions for the effective identification and punishment of persons committing such offenses;

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

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

security regulatory framework for e-commerce; recognition of the legal validity of transactions made on the Internet; determining the procedure for making 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 using cryptographic protection means in relation to the use of the Internet.

Recently, attempts have been made to legislatively regulate some of these problems.

Thus, one of the most serious problems today is spam - mass unsolicited mailing, usually of an advertising nature.

It is precisely because of its mass nature that spam causes such enormous damage to the global economy in general and to each user in particular. According to the report “Spam: Main Trends in the Second Quarter of 2006” published by Kaspersky Lab, in the second quarter of 2006 the share of spam on the RuNet was at least 70% of the total volume of mail traffic. By the end of the second quarter, the share of spam in the total 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 letter - from 4 to 84 seconds. A May 2004 survey by Nucleus Research found that, on average, every office worker receives 29 spam emails every day 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 $1,934 per year per employee.

But don’t forget that the damage caused by spam is not limited to lost work time. The final figure should include the costs of traffic, hardware and software that processes spam traffic, wages administrators, as well as such difficult-to-calculate parameters as lost profits and the risk of virus infection (it is no secret that malware is also sent along with spam mailings).

They began to fight against it, and the fight is going on in two directions - technical and legal. Technical methods countermeasures, such as filtering correspondence with special programs, have become quite effective. However, filtering can protect the recipient from some incoming unsolicited messages, but cannot combat the phenomenon as such.

The United States was the first to realize that the problem of spam cannot be solved without the adoption of laws establishing clear rules for sending advertising messages by e-mail. Nevada was the first state to pass anti-spam legislation. Back in July 1997, Nevada passed a law that restricted the sending of unsolicited commercial email. After the law was enacted, such letters were required to contain “subject” at the beginning of the line - 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 communications must include the sender's name, postal and email addresses, and instructions on how to opt out of receiving further such communications from the sender. The law prohibited falsification email address sender, and any software designed for such falsification is prohibited.

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

The common feature of all laws was compliance with the opt-out or “unsubscribe” principle, 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 have criminalized gross violations Anti-spam laws, for example in California, Colorado, Louisiana. Some states give recipients of such messages the ability to demand money from the sender for each message they receive 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 to adopt federal law, limiting such mailings. Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (Control Unsolicited Pornographic and Marketing Communications Act) was passed in 2003. The law was abbreviated as the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, which can be translated as the CAN-SPAM Act.

The CAN-SPAM Act states that an email may be sent to a recipient without the recipient's prior permission, but must include instructions not to receive further 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. The law prohibits indicating in the “subject” field information that could mislead about the nature of the letter received.

The maximum penalty for these violations in some cases may be imprisonment for up to 5 years and a fine. The law provides for the possibility for recipients to go to court to demand payment of $250 for each letter received that was sent in violation of the law. Providers and the prosecutor also have the right to go to court. The maximum amount of the claim cannot exceed $2 million, but the court may increase the amount of the claim three times if it determines that the violator acted intentionally or committed several violations of the law during the mailing. In addition, the violator may be subject to legal costs, including attorney's fees, which can amount to a very significant amount.

The legislation of 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 prohibited to send electronic messages without the prior consent of consumers. For other recipients, such mailing is permitted if the message specifies the “unsubscribe” procedure. This rule applies not only to email, but also to SMS messages.

In Finland, the individual's prior consent to receive advertising information. Sending advertising information to legal entities is possible without their prior consent, but with the possibility of “unsubscribing”.

Other countries are also developing legislation aimed at limiting spam, with bills incorporating the principle of recipients' prior consent to receive them. In particular, such bills have been developed in the UK and Spain.

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

The Directive expressly requires the recipient's prior consent to be obtained before sending an advertising message via electronic communication, be it a dialer, fax, email 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 permissible to send offers for goods and services similar to those that were previously provided, 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 undoubtedly harmful phenomenon in Russia was the adoption of the new Federal Law of March 13, 2006 No. 38-FZ “On Advertising”.

Since the Law came into force on July 1, 2006, the distribution of advertising over telecommunication networks, including through the use of telephone, fax, and mobile radiotelephone communications, is permitted only with the prior consent of the subscriber or addressee to receive advertising. In this case, advertising is considered distributed without the prior consent of the subscriber or addressee, unless the advertiser proves that such consent was obtained. The advertising distributor is obliged to immediately stop distributing advertising to the person who has approached him with such a demand (Part 1 of 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 distribution of advertising using means of selection and (or) dialing a subscriber number without human intervention (automatic dialing, automatic distribution).

Advertising that does not meet the above requirements is inappropriate. By general rule persons whose rights and interests are violated as a result of the dissemination of inappropriate advertising have the right to apply to in the prescribed manner to a court or arbitration court, including with claims for compensation of losses, including lost profits, for compensation for harm caused to the health of individuals and (or) property of individuals or legal entities, for compensation for moral damage (Part 2 of Article 38 of the Federal Law "About advertising").

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

1. Rassolov I.M.. Law and the Internet. Theoretical problems. 2nd ed., add. - M.: Norma, - 383 pp., 2009
2. 3.2. The economic basis of social employment policy: the main stages and problems of its optimization in developed countries
3. Representation of the country's economic interests abroad.
4. CHAPTER 4. INTERNET BANKING, STATUS, PROBLEMS AND DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS
5. Topic 2. BASIC PROVISIONS OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF PERSONALITY IN RUSSIA AND OTHER COUNTRIES
6. § 4. Legal status of Russian legal entities abroad
7. § 4. Civil legal status of Russian citizens abroad
8. Main trends in the development of mandatory reserve systems abroad
9. Basic forms of resolving economic disputes abroad
10. main stages in the development of administrative law in Russia and abroad
11. § 1. Basic forms of resolving economic disputes abroad
12. 11.2. USA. Economic problems of the country - the leader of the world economy
13. Bond J. / Trans. from English A.V. Verdi. Natural Nutrition: How to Eat According to Our Genetic Programming. - M.: Iris-press - 336 pp., 2003
14. § 6. Legal status of the ownership of the Russian Federation of Russian organizations abroad
15. 13.1.Main problems of obligations from offenses (delicts)
16. 3.2 Main parameters and characteristics of developing countries

- Codes of the Russian Federation - Legal encyclopedias - Copyright -

Solving legal problems associated with the classification of virtual entities, with determining the specifics of connections between interacting entities to identify emerging relationships, the role and influence of communities of virtual entities on the functioning of the state, becomes an extremely interesting and relevant task from the point of view of law.

The interaction of subjects in the global environment has its own characteristics and properties that characterize the relations of the virtual community. For example, various authors include the following as the main features of relations between subjects of a virtual community: openness, spontaneity (Yu. Habermas); informality, mobility, discreteness (A.I. Neklessa).

Besides:
1) independence of Network members (freedom to choose tasks);
2) plurality of leaders (a leader is a subject associated with information or an information resource relevant to the operation of the Network, or network interaction);
3) a unifying goal (individual interest of each member of the Network, unattainable outside the Network);
4) voluntary connections, provides the opportunity to flexibly change the structure and composition of the Network, quickly change the volume of resources in the Network;
5) multiple levels of interaction (everyone can interact with everyone directly) (M.M. Chuchkevich).
Subjects create virtual communities, or communities on the Internet, which play the role of a kind of superstructure over objective realities, act as a qualitatively different form of organizing communication between various socio-economic institutions, creating a different, parallel virtual space.

There are virtual communities operating on the Internet that violate the law with their activities: this is misuse intellectual property, dissemination of harmful information affecting the interests of various individuals and the state. To resolve the issue of responsibility for such actions, it is necessary to determine the territory of the commission. legal fact. A connection with territory is needed as a way to determine jurisdiction. This term is used in the Computer Crime Convention, signed in 2001 in Budapest. The Convention specifies that “each Party shall take legislative and other measures necessary to establish jurisdiction over any offence.”

But when determining jurisdiction, it is necessary to take into account that such communities are trans-territorial in nature, since its participants may be tied to different states or not at all.
For example, provisions defining the connection between jurisdiction and the structure of a domain name include Art. 8 of the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Telecommunications”, which states that all relations of persons whose activities are related to the registration and use of domain names in the “UZ” domain are subject to the legislation of Uzbekistan.
IN Russian Federation a ban on anonymity is also implemented. For example, the principle of openness presupposes a ban on putting forward an anonymous proposal made through state information systems (clause “b” clause 2. Part 2 of the Concept for the formation of a public presentation mechanism….

Ensuring the identification of the proposal initiator is expected to be carried out using a unified personal identification system within the framework of the federal state information system " one system identification and authentication in the infrastructure that ensures information and technological interaction of information systems used to provide government and municipal services in electronic form."

There is another opinion. So, M.S. Dashyan believes that the concept of international territory is most suitable for the Internet, i.e. space over which the sovereignty of any state does not apply. This is due to the fact that the Internet is quite difficult to classify as any of the known territories (international, state or territory with mixed status); the concept of international territory is most suitable for them.

In dispute resolution practice, both the first and second positions are taken into account. On the one hand, the domain zone top level really determines territorial affiliation, on the other hand, the server with software, from which information violations occur may be located in another state. In the second case, determining the location of a legal fact can be quite difficult. It is for this reason that the Republic of Belarus in 2010 adopted a Decree on the transfer of all participants in Internet relations to the Belarusian zone. Thus, the Decree stipulates that from July 1, 2010, activities related to the sale of goods, performance of work, provision of services on the territory of the Republic of Belarus using information networks, systems and resources connected to the Internet is carried out legal entities, their branches and representative offices established in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Belarus, with their location in the Republic of Belarus, as well as individual entrepreneurs, registered in the Republic of Belarus, using information networks, systems and resources of the national segment of the Internet, located on the territory of the Republic of Belarus and registered in the prescribed manner.

Taking into account the various technological features described above, the only suitable option for identifying subjects - participants in Internet relations is to develop a differentiated approach taking into account the features that the Network imposes on these subjects. So, we can summarize those signs and characteristics of persons whose activities are related to the use of the Internet. The combination of these features will allow us to formulate possible legal mechanisms of regulation. Let's give distinctive features such subjects and their communities.
1. The organizational structure of the community of individuals has been transformed into a global Network.
2. Management of the functioning of a community on the Internet is carried out through the technology on which this community functions. Management can be carried out through cloud technologies, big data technologies, anonymous networks, protocols and many others.
3. The possibility of anonymity in the actions of subjects.
4. Territorial distribution of community members.
5. Impossibility precise definition territorial affiliation.
6. Absence of founders in the presence of community participants.
7. Unlimited number of community participants.
In this regard, the presence of such characteristics allows communities of virtual subjects to carry out both legal and illegal activities, as well as to be recognized or not recognized by the law of a particular state.
For the most complete classification of virtual persons, it is necessary to consider their activities on the Internet from various points of view. Thus, associations of subjects according to the method of interaction can be divided into horizontal and vertical. So, A.M. Slaughter believes that horizontal networks are spontaneous, flexible, and arise from interaction state institutions or non-governmental organizations various countries.

Vertical - hierarchical, rigid, centralized and in some aspects of their activities resemble traditional states; they are “supernational” organizations that exist at the transnational level and act as a de facto alternative to traditional states.

At the same time, vertical and horizontal connections between individuals can be built on the basis of the technologies that they use to form relationships. Thus, an example of horizontal interaction between subjects is a torrent network, since the topology of this network is designed in the form of horizontal connections. The name of this network comes from the English peer-to-peer, which translates as equal to equal.

Accordingly, the interaction of participants in this network is built at the level of horizontal connections of technologically equal subjects.
Considering an association of individuals on the Internet as a community of individuals, a law enforcement officer may encounter a situation where the identification of individuals in such associations is difficult. People can carry out their activities under a fictitious name, age, or citizenship. In this case we can turn to technological methods identification. But, given the technological specifics and certain human skills, such identification may be unsuccessful.

If we consider the association of individuals on the Internet from the point of view organizational structure, on the basis of which this association operates, then it is necessary to consider this activity for compliance with the requirements of the legislation on registration of a person. Thus, if a given association is not registered in any state, then it is impossible to attribute it to any organizational and legal form existing in the world. In addition, one must take into account technological characteristics such an interaction platform that will allow us to determine the structure of connections between the participants of the association.

Examples of technologies used to circumvent the requirements of the identification law include anonymous networks or anonymous protocols - tor. Anonymous networks include computer networks created to achieve anonymity on the Internet and operating on top of the global Network. The first such network was Freedom, which operated from 1998 to 2001. This network used a cryptographic protocol, and therefore incoming messages for users of this network could not be identified. At the same time, other projects, called onion ones, began to actively develop; the tor protocol was developed based on such technological models. Currently, tor networks are actively used to implement anonymous activities.

Moreover, most states are trying to fight these networks by blocking their activities. This is due to the fact that these networks, due to their complexity, are almost inaccessible to law enforcement agencies. The Russian Federation, represented by the Federal State Institution “Scientific and Production Association “Special Equipment and Communications” of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, in order to counter terrorism, launched a project in July 2014 to analyze the activities of tor networks.

A.V. Manoilo believes that “virtual social communities have the same qualities as supranational information super-corporations, which makes them a dangerous subject of competition and a natural opponent of information super-corporations in the struggle for spheres of influence. The only difference that distinguishes these two types is social structures information society is that in competition super-corporations mainly use their own information potential and intellectual resources, while virtual communities include in their structure, unite ideology and attract others’ material and intellectual resources that do not belong to them into their own competitive struggle, completely borrowing the structural elements of other social systems.”

The public activity of such communities is a significant fact, since this activity affects the interests of members of society, participants in information circulation and exchange of information in the IT environment.

It can definitely be said that it is technology that determines possible options relationship building and opportunity legal regulation these relationships. From the point of view of law, communities of virtual persons cannot be unambiguously attributed to any of the existing classifications of persons. However, despite the legal difficulties, such communities are participants in legal relations.
N.V. Vlasova, S.A. Gracheva, M.A. Meshcheryakova also believe that “a reliable system for identifying users of social networks is needed, including by IP address, ... as provided for by the American National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace.” In addition, the implementation of a minimum set of requirements for user identification in order to reduce the number of anonymous users and ensure identification of the real identity of the social network user.

Thus, we can conclude that in order to identify participants in relationships on the Internet, it is necessary to formulate the concept of “virtual person”. A virtual anonymous person is a person who performs certain actions on the Internet. Determination of the place of activity of this person carried out through technological procedures for determining the IP address, domain name of a given person, etc.

Legal problems of the Internet virtual environment

1. History of the development of the Internet

The term "Internet" comes from Interconnected Networks. The prototype of the modern Internet network is considered to be the American military-industrial territorial network ARPANet (from the English Advanced Research Projects Agency Network). The system was developed by scientists from the University of California at Los Angeles, Stanford research center, University of Utah, University of California at Santa Barbara. In 1969, as part of the project, the network united four of these scientific institutions, all work was funded by the US Department of Defense. Then the ARPANET network began to actively grow and develop.

On January 2, 1969, it was decided to begin work on a project to create a network of computers for defense organizations. The network must remain operational in the face of a nuclear attack. By 1972, 40 computer centers could exchange e-mail, conduct sessions with electronic computers remote for several hundred and thousands of kilometers, and transfer data files. The ideological basis of the project was the absence of a common control center and the complete independence of each segment. This decision was due to the need to ensure the operation of information transmission channels in the event of failure of individual nodes. When a network was built hierarchically, failure of the central element led to the loss of functionality of the entire network.

In 1984, the domain name system was developed. In 1988, the Internet Relay Chat (IRC) protocol was invented, which made it possible to communicate in real time. A single global information interaction. In 1998, Pope John Paul II established World Internet Day on September 30. The number of Internet users is approaching 1.5 billion people.

Internet – This is an organizationally ordered set of documents and information technology.

2. Legal regulation on the Internet

internet network law problem

Legal regulation on the Internet, as in any other area of ​​social relations, is necessary, however, the application of rules in this environment faces great problems. The effect of national regulations extends to the entire territory of a particular state. Countries have organized government bodies designed to adopt, implement, and, if necessary, force compliance with certain legal norms. The circulation of information on the Internet occurs freely, and it easily crosses state borders. Information can be stored on the territory of one state, and the users of this information can be located in another, and these can be countries with different political systems, the level of influence of religion on the life of society, the degree of freedom of speech, and cultural traditions. The lack of information about the geographical boundaries of the state leads to a clash of national legislations of countries and a revision of their provisions. Consequently, there is a problem of forming a new international information legislation. The development of this branch of law must take into account the legal properties of information. On the Internet, information is provided in in electronic format, does not have a solid carrier. This complicates, for example, the evidentiary procedure in court. How to prove that the information was located in certain time exactly on this site?

In the scientific community, there are two groups representing opposing points of view on the possibility of regulating social relations in the Internet environment. One view is that the Internet is an environment in which law is fundamentally inapplicable. Another group of scientists defends the point of view that law should exist on the Internet; for this it is necessary to take into account the characteristics and legal properties of objects regarding which subjects of this environment enter into relationships leading to legal consequences.

To develop your own personal point of view, you must first determine whether the Internet is an object or a subject of law? The object of law is certain material and intangible benefits regarding which legal relations arise. For example, the objects of civil rights are property, property rights, works, services, information, results of intellectual activity. The Internet does not have one specific owner, owner, the Internet as a whole does not belong to anyone, therefore, the Internet is not an object of law.

Subject of law is a person (individual and legal), state, state or municipal entity, who by law has the ability to have and exercise directly or through a representative rights and legal obligations39. The Internet is neither

an international organization, neither a state entity, nor a public association, nor a legal entity that would enter into legal relations with any other structure. Therefore, the Internet is not a subject of law.

However, there are a great many individual objects that are part of the Internet and owned by specific individuals. There is also a large number of entities that enter into legal relations with each other in connection with these individual objects.

There are three groups of entities that operate on the Internet:

Persons creating the software and hardware part of the Internet infrastructure;

Persons producing and distributing information on the Internet;

Persons consuming information from the Internet.

The main objects regarding which information relations arise on the Internet are the following:

Software and hardware systems, Information Systems, information and telecommunication technologies as a means of forming information infrastructure, means of communication and telecommunications that ensure the implementation of information processes;

Information, information resources, information products, information services;

Domain names (they must be unique. There are restrictions on obtaining a particular domain name, for example, the name should not be similar to the name of a government body or a well-known trademark);

Information rights and freedoms;

Interests of the individual, society, state in information sphere;

Information integrity and information sovereignty of the state;

Information Security.

Basically, relations between Internet entities are regulated by traditional rules of civil law, for example, an agreement is concluded between an individual and an Internet provider to obtain access to the network, that is, an information service is provided.

The basis for the legal regulation of relations on the Internet can be taken as the norms of acts of information legislation, the main directions of which are:

Legislation on the rights, freedoms and responsibilities of man and citizen in the field of information circulation;

Legislation on management in the field of information and informatization at the federal level, the levels of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation and local government;

Legislation on information resources, archival funds, documented information, office work;

Legislation on restricted information (state secrets, commercial secrets, know-how, official secrets, professional secrets, personal data);

Legislation on the circulation of intellectual property (copyright, rights related to copyright, patent law, right to a company name, right to a commercial designation, right to a trademark, right to an appellation of origin of a product);

Media legislation;

Legislation on the creation and application of information systems, information technologies and means of providing them;

Legislation on the protection of information and the rights of subjects in the field of information processes and informatization;

Administrative and criminal legislation on liability for offenses in the information sphere.

Let's look at examples of the legal regulation of the circulation of objects unique to the Internet.

Domain name. Each computer has a unique IP address, consisting of four numbers separated by dots. To make addresses easier to remember, each numeric address was assigned a symbolic name, that is, a domain name system was created. For example, the numeric address 62.76.92.203 corresponds to the symbolic name - bsu.edu.ru.

As a domain name, phrases that are directly related to the owner are used, for example, the name of a legal entity, its trademark, surname or nickname for an individual. However there is whole group persons who based their business on domain registration (cybersquatters). The names of registered domains have no relation to the persons who registered them. The purpose of such actions is their further resale to the owner of a similar means of individualization or other interested party of the domain name. Therefore, the number of proceedings regarding the ownership of a particular domain name has increased.

In October 1999, the International Corporation for the Allocation of Address Space on the Internet (ICANN) adopted two important regulatory documents for the Internet, establishing a new procedure for international arbitration regarding the rights to use domain names: domain names(Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy or UDRP) and Rules for the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. With the adoption of these documents, a fundamentally created new system out-of-court dispute resolution to address cases of domain registrations with speculative intentions. Using this system, tribunals formed within special Arbitration Centers make decisions on the dispute between the owner of a trademark and the owner of a similar domain name. Russian companies and citizens have already become participants in domain dispute proceedings according to the established rules.

The number of registered domain names in zone.ru in 2008 increased by 64% and exceeded 1.8 million, according to a press release from the Regional Network Information Center, the largest registrar of Russian domains40. In total, there are about 160 million registered domain names in the world. So legal regulation in this area of ​​information law is very significant.

The second example concerns websites. A website is a collection of hypertext documents and software that allows you to work with these documents. A large number of specialists in various fields of professional activity are involved in the development and operation of the site, these are designers, programmers, authors of documents, and operators providing information transfer services. Their complex relationships must be regulated by legal norms of various branches of law, including, but not only, information law.

Experts from the World Economic Forum presented the next annual report on the development of information technology in the world (Global Information Technology Report 2007-2008)41. Such reports have been published since 2001 and are official indicators of achievements in the field of information and communication technologies (ICT). The reports reflect the index of readiness of the economies of leading countries to function in the information society. Russia, since 2002, when it was first included in the ranking, has consistently ranked in the sixtieth place. In the latest report submitted, the Russian Federation dropped to 72nd place overall.

The analysis shows that a negative contribution to Russia’s rating is made, first of all, by government policy in managing the ICT sector. In terms of the quality of government regulation of information circulation, Russia ranks 115th out of 127 countries participating in the rating; on the quality of the legislative framework related to the information branch of law – 82;

in terms of the degree of protection of intellectual property - 113. Low places in the following indicators also do not contribute to an increase in the overall rating: independence of the judicial system - 102nd place, efficiency of law enforcement agencies - 103. For all of the above areas, on the basis of which the evaluation criteria were formed, the state bears direct responsibility a device that is obviously increasingly unable to cope with its tasks.

Until recently, the legislation of the United States of America in the field of the Internet had two main legal norms adopted in 1996 (“Telecommunications Act of 1996” as additions to the federal law “Communications Act of 1934” in the form of a new paragraph 230 “Protection of personal blocking and protection from offensive materials") and concerning 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 relieves the provider of any responsibility for actions to limit access to information that he regards as offensive, false, promoting violence, etc., as well as for actions to distribute tools intended for carrying out these actions. Despite the fact that such approaches were very liberal, public reaction turned out to be 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 the regulatory documents of the European Parliament and the 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 from the perspective 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 issues addressed in it are:

Safety. The service provider has the responsibility to ensure the information security of its services, if required, in cooperation with the owner of the public telecommunications network.

Telecommunications confidentiality.

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.), conditions for their use and storage by the service provider, as well as the obligations of the supplier data destruction services.

Rights of a consumer (user of a public telecommunications network) in relation to his personal data, which is posted in electronic or printed directories intended for public use.

The second most significant precedent in foreign legislation regulating the Internet was the German “Multimedia Law”. In contrast to the American approach, German legislators hold service providers responsible for content provided by third parties if they are aware of the content and blocking it is technically possible and reasonable. 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 “proprietary” information they make available for use. The law exempts service providers from liability for content provided by third parties only if they provide only access to the information.

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

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

The lack of legislative acts on the development of the Internet in Russia, as well as the possibility of their effective application, is already having a negative impact on the development of public relations (for example, in the field of exercising citizens’ rights to information, preventing the dissemination of information affecting the honor and dignity of citizens, protecting intellectual property , in other spheres of socio-political life). Moreover, as relations related to the Internet become involved in 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 seek appropriate services from specialized organizations outside of Russia, which, taking into account the specifics of the Internet can be easily implemented.

Among the main problems that need prompt regulatory regulation to prevent the Russian segment of the Internet from falling behind global trends and to ensure the protection of the state interests of the Russian Federation in this area, many experts include *(125):

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

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

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

determination of the legal regime of information posted on the Internet or transmitted through 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, antisocial calls), as well as the creation of regulatory conditions for the effective identification and punishment of persons committing such offenses;

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

creation of regulatory conditions for electronic document management in the Internet; establishing principles and procedures for using 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 the legal validity of transactions made on the Internet; determining the procedure for making 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 using cryptographic protection means in relation to the use of the Internet.

Legal information systems

Special view information systems represent systems focused on solving national problems. An example of such information systems is 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 companies such as the research and production enterprise Garant-Service, ConsultantPlus, Kodeks, Inventa, and Intralex. Total number of computer legal systems, including local networks, based on the distributed reference systems mentioned above, amounts to hundreds of thousands. Each of them has its own profile. For example, "ConsultantPlus" includes systems such as: "Prof Version", which contains federal legislation; "Expert application" containing all acts of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, 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 that regulate the most significant social relations in all sectors economic activity; as well as other information banks. The systems of collective and private users are regularly updated, under the terms of the contract. The system data is updated daily on the Internet.

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

The reference legal system "Garant" has a stricter focus on areas of legislation. Its structure includes four blocks, or groups, of information: legal framework; Electronic archive; library (paper documents); reference books and programs on legal topics that are distributed to users. Russian legislation of this reference system is presented on the Internet. For example, the Reuters agency broadcasts news Russian legislation based on data coming from the Garant network.

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

Another problem is solved by the legal information agency Intralex based on the USIS system. Here is the beginning of solving expert-analytical problems based on the interests of the user when using a database on the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Psychic viruses

A mental virus is a phenomenon that can infect people with memes. (A meme is a unit of cultural information. A meme can be any idea, symbol, manner or course 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, the noosphere and the information field for mental viruses are the breeding ground necessary for their life. 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, and gossip. They are spreading at an alarming rate mass media. Primitive obscene humor encourages the spread of a dangerous infection of consciousness, causing base emotions. Countless vulgar stories from the lives of show business “stars” and politicians, circulated by the yellow press - powerful vehicle spread of mental viruses. They demonstrate all the basic 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 consciousness cause a malfunction in the body, redirecting and dispersing energy flows.

Here is the action diagram of psychic viruses:

adsorption - penetration of viruses into consciousness (each type of virus is characterized by its own individual method of penetration);

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

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

41) Among the national interests of Russia, as well as other states, a special place is occupied by the implementation 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 permitted). This principle is enshrined in the main international legal documents, the Constitution of the Russian Federation and a number of other laws. This right includes the freedom to hold one's beliefs without interference and the freedom to seek, receive and disseminate information and ideas by any means and regardless of state borders. The Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993) also enshrines these rights and freedoms: - the right to integrity private life, personal and family secrets, protection of one’s honor and good name - Part 1 of Art. 23;

Right to privacy of correspondence, telephone conversations, postal, telegraph and other messages - Part 2 of Art. 23;

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

Freedom of the 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 disseminate information by anyone in a legal way- part 4 art. 29;

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

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

Right of access to cultural values- part 2 art. 44.

42) Federal Law of July 27, 2006 N 149-FZ (as amended on December 19, 2016) “On information, information technologies and information protection” (as amended and supplemented, entered into force on 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, distributing information and methods of implementing such processes and methods; This Federal Law regulates relations arising when:

1) exercising the right to search, receive, transmit, produce and distribute information;

2) application of information technologies;

3) ensuring information security.

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, transmit, produce and disseminate information in any legal way;

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

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

4) equality of rights for the 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 during 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 requisite that allows you to establish the absence of distortion of information in an electronic document from the moment the ES is generated and confirm that the ES belongs to the owner. The value of the attribute is obtained as a result of cryptographic transformation of information.

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

The owner of the electronic signature certificate is the individual in whose name the electronic signature certificate was issued by the certification center. Each certificate owner has two digital signature keys: 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 obliged to keep his private key secret.

Public key electronic signature (electronic signature verification key) is uniquely linked to the private electronic signature key and is intended to verify the authenticity of the electronic signature.

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 type 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 regulations adopted in accordance with them or by an agreement between participants of electronic interaction;

2) the ability for participants in electronic interaction to use, at their discretion, any information technology and (or) technical means, allowing you to comply with the requirements of this Federal

law regarding the use specific types electronic signatures;

3) the inadmissibility of recognizing an electronic signature and (or) an electronic document signed by it as having no legal force only on the basis that such an electronic signature was not created with 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 Signatures”, there is a division into:

· 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 it has been signed; created using electronic signature tools.

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

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 simple electronic signature key is used in accordance with the rules established by the operator of the information system using 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 recognizing electronic documents signed with a simple electronic signature as equivalent to paper documents signed with a handwritten signature, must provide, in particular:

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

2) the obligation of the person creating and (or) using the simple electronic signature key to maintain its confidentiality.

3. The rules established by Articles 10 - 18 of this Federal Law do not apply to relations related to 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 APPLICATION OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE

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

2. Electronic reporting for regulatory authorities.

3. Government services. Every citizen of the Russian Federation can obtain an electronic signature to receive government services. Using an electronic signature, a citizen can certify documents and applications sent to departments electronically.

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

5. Arbitration court. If any disputes arise between organizations, they can be used as evidence in court. electronic documents. According to the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, documents received by fax, electronic or other communication, signed with an electronic signature or another analogue of a handwritten signature, are considered written evidence.

6. Document flow with individuals. I must admit this area The use of EP is very specific and is still rarely used, however, it is possible. With the help of electronic signatures, various documents can be certified individuals. Thanks to this opportunity, remote workers, based on service contracts, for example, can issue work acceptance certificates in electronic form.

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 determining legal concept"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 Internet;

be able to navigate in legal problems that arise when using network technologies in the life of society, correlate trends in the development of information technologies with potential problems of legal regulation of virtual space;

own fundamental terminology of the section being studied, skills in analyzing educational and scientific literature, means and methods of scientific research.

Problems of legal definition of the concept “Internet”

At the present stage social development Issues of legal regulation of information and communication technologies have acquired particular relevance. Great importance The information and telecommunications network “Internet” currently plays a role in the life of almost every inhabitant of our planet. Modern technologies communications and information processing, mobile telephony, etc. served as the basis for the fact that the Internet has become necessary tool V Everyday life each of us. The revolutionary impact of the Internet is affecting 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 appropriate policies and regulatory frameworks that stimulate competition and innovation, ensure economic and financial stability, promote cooperation to optimize global networks, combat abuses that undermine network integrity, 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 of May 16, 2011, access to the information and telecommunications network “Internet” is classified as a basic (or inalienable) human right, and restricting access to it is recognized as a violation of basic human rights.

Currently, 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 information transmission technologies. The best known and most global of telecommunications networks, the Internet's impact extends to virtually everything. social spheres and processes, which in turn requires clear normative regulation of relations in the virtual space.

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

Thus, it has become urgently necessary to intervene in the activities of Internet users on the part of the state. Indeed, such an important tool for 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, currently the attention of the legislator and most researchers is aimed at resolving private problems in Internet relations. And there is an acute problem of creating Internet law as a comprehensive 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 .

The problem of legislative regulation of Internet relations is, first of all, the lack of an accurate legislative definition of the term “Internet” that would reflect its entire modern essence. Unfortunately, such a definition has not been developed by any science and most often the technical characteristics 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 pressing tasks of legal science at present is the mobilization of theoretical and methodological research aimed at understanding 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 forming the conceptual apparatus of information law, including the development of the legal concept of “Internet,” stands out.

Federal Law No. 149-FZ “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection” attempted to fill this gap, but the legislator followed the already beaten path of defining the term “Internet” through its technical component. However, a legal definition of global computer network.

In our opinion, the legislator should have formulated the concept of “Internet” and included it in Art. 2 “Basic concepts...” of the Federal Law “On 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 information. The Internet as an international computer network is also mentioned in Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated March 17, 2008 No. 351 “On measures to ensure information security of the Russian Federation when using information and telecommunication networks for international information exchange” (as amended on July 25, 2014) 1 .

It has been stated more than once that this position is outdated and does not meet the modern needs of society. According to the Russian Association of Electronic Communications (RAEC), there is an urgent need to replace the concept of “information and communication network” with “Internet network”.

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 telecommunications network, which is a technological system designed for transmitting information over communication lines, with access to it means computer technology.

This 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 via one or more interfaces. At the same time, the concept technological system even more limited - a finite set of objects of production and performers for execution under regulated production conditions. Thus, the Internet is a finite number of computers participating in any technological process. This understanding does not correspond to reality, since the main characteristics of the Internet are its limitlessness and multisystem nature.

The “Model Law on the Fundamentals of Internet Regulation”, adopted in St. Petersburg in May 2011 at the 36th plenary meeting of the Interparliamentary Assembly of the CIS Member States, provides more reasonable definition The Internet as a global information and telecommunications network connecting information systems and telecommunication networks of different countries through a global address space, based on the use of Internet Protocol (IP) and Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) complexes and providing the opportunity to implement various forms of communication, including posting information for an unlimited number of people 1.

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

Let us turn to 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 top level on the Information Society in Geneva in 2003 and in Tunis in 2005, stated that “the Internet has become a public resource global scale"and its regulation should be carried out by states taking into account this particularity of it.

The Ninth UN World Forum on Internet Governance (IGF), which took place from September 2 to 5, 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 when using the Internet in the Russian Federation (2013)”, proposed by the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, 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 fundamentals.

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

There are other opinions. So, E.S. Andryushchenko proposes to consider the Internet as a global decentralized system of information and telecommunication networks connecting on the basis of uniform protocols Various types computers, and S.V. Petrovsky - how international network public telecommunications, 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 for 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 information space could solve the problem of describing its legal essence.

However, in Russian legal science the dominant opinion is that the Internet is not a legal phenomenon and cannot be a subject or object of law. We completely disagree with this, since there are specifics of relationships associated with working on the Internet. Its emergence and development introduces many fundamentally new things into the nature of the relationships between people and organizations communicating with each other through the network. Wherein main goal of the current period is the legislative consolidation of the foundations for regulating relations on the Internet, as well as the regulation of certain areas, parties, and issues 1 .

At the same time, mention of the Internet as a space can be found as separate novelties 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, Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated June 1, 2012 No. 761 “On the National Strategy of Action in the Interests of Children for 2012-2017” talks about the rules safe behavior in the Internet space.

• Okinawa Charter for the Global Information Society // Diplomatic Bulletin. 2000. No. 8. P. 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 social state: Collection of scientific works. M.: IGP RAS; IPO “At the Nikitskie Gate”, 2011. P. 16.