Roskomnadzor blocked innocent web-sites lawfully, the court rules

When the Russian court decided the Telegram is to blocked in Russia, the Russian internet watchdog Roskomnadzor proceed to restrict access to this messenger in Russia. But the messenger did not intend to give up and most Russian media space witness the battle between Roskomandzor and Telegram. Telegram changed its IP addresses and Roskomnadzor blocked millions of them. Many web-sites were blocked, just because their IP address allegedly has been used by Telegram for circumvention of blocking.

Some companies, whose web-resources or web-site fallen under blocking of IP addresses, claim they suffered millions of losses. Who will reimburse these losses? These companies could not take and handle orders made by customers, they could not execute their obligations and all what they could to do, in order to continue to run their business, it is changing the IP address. In relation to web-site it is easy to make. But in relation to web-resource, automatic systems, relying on connection to net (which is also using IP addresses) it is not so easy. Now there is still a question – who is responsible for wrong blockings?

One Russian company has filed a suit against Roskomnadzor for wrong blocking. The company’s IP addresses has fallen under blocking by Roskomnadzor, but its web-site has been not included in the registry of forbidden web-sites and the company has been not notified of blocking. Due to wrong blocking the company suffered damages – half of million Roubles. But this sum was not included in the suit. The company only asked the court to admit the Roskomnadzor’s decision to block company’s IP address as illegal and exclude company’s IP address from the registry of forbidden IP addresses.

Roskomnadzor argued it has not violated the law. According to Russian internet watch dog the blocking of company’s IP address has been executed under the court order – it was a part of execution of the court order in Russian territory. The Roskomnadzor is agree that company’s web-site is legal and did not contain any information in violation of Russian law, but, in order to execute the court order and the requirement of the general prosecutor, it has no other way except to block company’s IP address. Roskomnadzor also believes the hosting provider, providing the company with hosting, is guilty, but not Roskomnadzor.

The office of general prosecutor has filed a brief to the court. This brief stated that the requirement of general prosecutor, the Roskomnadzor referred to, did not contain anything about blocking of company’s IP address. The requirement stated about restriction of access to seven accounts to Telegram and to four services allowing circumvention of blocking. The company is intending to appeal the dismissal.